Peeling Back The Layers Of Taqiyah

Who has not heard of taqiyah? But did you know that it is onion shaped? Taqiyah sounds and means the same as the Sanskrit word thugee from the root sthag. They may be related. The idea behind the taqiyah is to deceive the victim and when he is least prepared overpower him and subdue him. This was also the philosophy of the Indian thugs.

Taqiyah has many layers. The most common form is when Muslims deny that certain Islamic behaviors have anything to do with Islam.

On October 27, the BBC aired a documentary in which Mo Ansar, a Muslim activist in UK, was shown addressing a group of English Defense League members. He wanted to meet them in order to dispel their misunderstandings of Islam and to prove that Islam poses no threat to their country and their way of life. How could he do that when Islam’s goal is to become dominant over all religions and nations? Well, he did it like any Muslim would do. He lied. (Mo’s speech to EDL is at minute 10).

Mo starts by saying “as somebody who was born in this country and is British, I think I uphold British values. I am also a Muslim. Islam is not here to take over the country. Islam is not here to take over the world. That is not the Islam that I know. Islam that I know is one that believes in co-existence and honors and respects British values.”

Nothing can be further from the truth. The British and Islamic values are diametrically opposed. They cannot co-exist. The British values are based on democracy. Democracy implies equality. Iranian Journalist Amir Taheri says, “Equality is unacceptable in Islam. Un-believers cannot be equal to believers and women are not equal to men. Even the non-Muslims are not deemed to be equal. The People of the Book (Jews and Christians) are accepted as second class citizens and allowed to live in an Islamic state provided they pay the protection tax; Jizyah. But the pagans, atheists and idolaters are not regarded as fully humans. According to the Quran, the idolaters are to be killed wherever they are found.” (9:5)

In the April 9, 2002 issue, The Wall Street Journal published the concept of blood money in Saudi Arabia. If a person has been killed or caused to die by another, the latter has to pay blood money or compensation, as follow.
100,000 riyals if the victim is a Muslim man,
50,000 riyals if a Muslim woman,
50,000 riyals if a Christian man,
25,000 riyals if a Christian woman,
6,666 riyals if a Hindu man,
3,333 riyals if a Hindu woman.

According to this hierarchy, a Muslim man’s life is worth 33 times that of a Hindu woman. This hierarchy is based on the Islamic definition of human rights and is rooted in the Quran and the Sharia. How can we talk of democracy when the concept of equality in Islam is inexistent?

This is not a quirk of Saudi Arabia. The prophet of Islam advised Muslims not to aid non-Muslims to seek justice if they are abused by a Muslim. In his much celebrated edict of Medina, he declared, “A believer shall not slay a believer for the sake of an unbeliever, nor shall he aid an unbeliever against a believer.” The same document states, “Whoever is convicted of killing a believer… the believers shall be against him as one man, and they are bound to take action against him.”

The Quran 3:28 prohibits Muslims to take non-Muslims as their leaders, or even as friends. If Muslims tell the truth about their hostile intention, they will be kicked out from the countries that they intend to overtake. The same verse allows them to lie, “by way of precaution, that ye may guard yourselves from them.”

Co-existence? Yes there is co-existence in Islam, but only if the non-Muslims are reduced into dhimmis, and accept to pay tributes to Muslims while feeling themselves humiliated and subdued. (Q. 9:29)

One characteristic of democracy is freedom of belief. This is utterly alien to Islam. The Quran 3: 85 says, “whoso desires another religion than Islam it shall not be accepted of him.” The punishment of apostasy in Islam is death. No Islamic country allows its Muslim citizens to change their religion.

Mo also assured his audience that Islam is not here to take over the world. He lied. People often make the mistake of comparing Islam to Christianity and other faiths. All religions are personal. They are about enlightenment or relationship with God. Islam is about world domination. The focus of Islam is on expansion. A hadith narrated by Bukhari (4: 53: 386) makes this clear. It says that when Umar sent Muslim army to Persia, “the representative of Khosrau came out with 40,000 warriors, and an interpreter got up saying, “Let one of you talk to me!” Al-Mughira replied, “Ask whatever you wish.” The other asked, “Who are you?” Al-Mughira replied, “We are some people from the Arabs; we led a hard, miserable, disastrous life. We used to suck the hides and the date stones from hunger; we used to wear clothes made up of fur of camels and hair of goats, and to worship trees and stones. While we were in this state, the Lord of the Heavens and the Earths, Elevated is His Remembrance and Majestic is His Highness, sent to us from among ourselves a Prophet whose father and mother are known to us. Our Prophet, the Messenger of our Lord, has ordered us to fight you till you worship Allah Alone or give Jizya (i.e. tribute); and our Prophet has informed us that our Lord says:– “Whoever amongst us is killed (i.e. martyred), shall go to Paradise to lead such a luxurious life as he has never seen, and whoever amongst us remain alive, shall become your master.”

The order to fight till the non-Muslims worship Allah has not changed. Muslims will not abandon their quest for domination until they succeed or they are defeated. They have no choice in this. They are programmed to spread Islam through deception or war. They can’t be a Muslim and not advance their religion. The obligation to spread Islam is on every Muslim. We have the choice. We can submit to them, or fight back and defeat them. But how can we do that if we are not even aware that we are under attack? Taqiyah is what Muslims do to keep us in the sedated state.

Muhammad said al Islamo deenun va dawlah, (Islam is religion and state). The goal of Islam is to take over the world and establish a world caliphate. Without this goal Islam becomes meaningless. The whole idea of jihad, which is an obligation on every Muslim, is to expand the Islamic domain. It is also said that the bigger jihad is the struggle against one’s self. This is a lie too. Many scholars of Islam have refuted this as an innovation, something that was never said by Muhammad.

Jihad is through war, through financing the war (zakat) and through deception. The disagreement between Muslims is not in whether the west should become Islamic or not, but in whether it should be annexed through qital (fighting) or through taqiyah (deceiving).

The Quran 9:33 says, Allah will cause Islam to prevail over all religions. One does not have to read the history of Islamic conquest and oppression of their vanquished nations throughout the last 1400 years to know Muslims have no regards for the human rights of the non-Muslims. A look at how the minorities are treated in Muslim majority countries in the 21st century can make that point clear.

When Muslims become the majority, they deny the minorities any participation in political life. No non-Muslim is allowed to run for the head of any Islamic country and where they are allowed to become a member of parliament, it is only as a representative of their people. They are like ambassadors of their co-religionists in the Islamic state. They have no role in how the country should be run, but only as a liaison between the state and their co-religionists who are regarded as second class citizens.

Some of the EDL members expressed their concerns about their daughters who had to married to Muslims and brainwash to cut their ties with their family. Mo Ansar responded with more lies. He said, “If there are girls who have converted to Islam and are told you cannot meet your family; if that happens, I’d say now clearly, that it is not allowed in Islam.”

Mo should know that Muhammad ordered his daughter Zeinab to leave her unbelieving husband Abul As, until he was forced to convert and remarry her. He told his followers to cut their ties with their families and to emigrate from Mecca. He even said “if they turn back then take them and kill them wherever you find them.”(4:89).

Everything Mo said in that meeting was a lie. Of course he is not an ignorant Muslim. He just considered that in that gathering lying was more beneficial that telling the truth and that too is acceptable in Islam.

Muslims are permitted to lie even under oath to promote Islam and when the necessity justifies it. All they have to do for expiation of lying under oath is to feed someone or fast for three days (Q. 5:89). The Quran also says, “Allah will not call you to account for thoughtlessness (vain) in your oaths, but for the intention in your hearts; and He is Oft-forgiving, Most Forbearing.” (Q. 2:225). So if the intent is to advance Islam all lies are permissible.

Imam Ghazzali (1058-1111), arguably the greatest Islamic scholar noted, “Speaking is a means to achieve objectives. If praise worthy aim is attainable through both telling the truth and lying, it is unlawful to accomplish through lying because there is no need for it. When it is possible to achieve such an aim by lying but not by telling the truth, it is permissible to lie if attaining the goal is permissible.”

Mo’s deception had no bounds. He even went as far as saying “I have been fighting for gay rights for 15 years. Many people are surprised by that.” If it were true, it would be very surprising. But it is not true. In at least five places the Quran condemns homosexuality in the severest term and in 4:16, it says, punish them both, unless they repent and amend.

Mo’s audience however, was not fooled. One person noted, “He is just pandering to the audience, saying things he thinks the audience likes to hear. He thinks we are all dimwits.”

Was Mo Ansar really sincere? In the same documentary, (minutes 25) when Tommy Robinson said, there are certain verses in the Quran that glorify murder, rape and slavery and suggested that these verses should be phased out, Mo blamed the lack of understanding of the Quran and not the Quran itself. How can “slay the unbelievers wherever you find them, let them find harshness in you,” or beat your wife if you fear she is thinking of disobeying you” can be interpreted in any other way? The Quran is a book of hate and violence. Mo knows it, but he hides the truth.

Mo’s insincerity was put to the litmus test by a fellow Muslim, Maajid Nawaaz, who asked him whether he agreed with the Quranic law of chopping the limbs of a thief and other barbaric laws such as stoning. Mo first tried to play taqiyah and said he wouldn’t, but when pressed, he began stuttering and tried to evade the answer by saying he would seek the consensus of the ulama. It became clear that he was lying all along. He would not go against any of the teachings of the Quran, even when they are all barbaric and inhumane.

What about Maajid Nawaaz? He had no problem saying some of the teachings of the Quran are morally reprehensible. This is quite a statement for a Muslim. Is he sincere? Maajid is the chairman of Quilliam Foundation, a self-styled organization that claims to counter Islamic extremism.

He was a recruiter of Hizbul Tahrir, a terrorist organization, and an advocate for Islamic caliphate for 13 years. He says that he was reformed while serving a five years jail sentence in Egypt for his political activities. Now he claims that he rejects extremism and is a moderate Muslim.

Taqiyah is like an onion. One layer hides another layer, which hides yet another layer and so on and so forth. There is nothing surprising for a Muslim to realize Islam is not compatible with our time and leave it. I made the transition myself and have helped thousands to do it. However, those who come to see the truth, leave Islam. They don’t go around promoting a moderate version of Islam. There is no such thing. You either accept the inhuman and backward teachings of Islam or you don’t accept Islam at all.

Maajid claims to be a Muslim who rejects the Sharia. He is not alone. There are a few more in Canada and USA who make such claim. Among them are, Tarik Fatah, Irshad Manji, Zuhdi Jaser, just to name a few. Can these people be trusted? Can a Muslim reject any part of the Quran?

We have to understand that there is a big difference between Islam and Christianity or Judaism. Muslims believe that the Quran is the verbatim word of God. Jews and Christians believe their sacred texts were written by humans who were inspired by God. This is a crucial distinction. So while a Jew or a Christian can reject an outdated part of his scripture as the error of its authors, a Muslim does not have that luxury. Muslims can’t pick and choose. Allah in the Quran asserts, “Today have I perfected your religious law for you, and have bestowed upon you the full measure of My blessings, and willed that self-surrender unto Me shall be your religion.” (Q.5:3). How can one add or subtract to what God has perfected? That idea is preposterous to Muslims.

Another verse says, “Do you, then, believe in some parts of the divine writ and deny the truth of other parts? What, then, could be the reward of those among you who do such things but ignominy in the life of this world and, on the Day of Resurrection? They will be consigned to most grievous suffering. For God is not unmindful of what you do.” (Q.2:85)

It is unlikely that Maajid and his fellow so called moderate Muslims don’t know this. So how can they call themselves Muslim and reject the clear laws of the Quran? They are playing another layer of taqiyah. Their goal is not to reform Islam, something they know is impossible, but to buy legitimacy and more time for it until they become the majority and take over the world. I sounded the clarion about the danger of Islam 16 years ago, and now I warn you again that these so called moderates are wolves in sheep clothing. Don’t fear the terrorists. Fear the enemy within.

Muslims are allowed to reject part or all of Islam and even malign their prophet in order to deceive their victims. Bukhari 5:59: 369 narrates that in Medina there was a young handsome man, a leader of the Jewish tribe of Bani Nadir, by the name of Ka’b ibn Ashraf. After Muhammad banished their sister tribe of Bani Qainuqa from the city, Ka’b went to Mecca seeking protection from the Quraish. When Muhammad heard the news he went on his pulpit and said, “who is willing to kill Ka’b bin Al-Ashraf who has hurt Allah and His Apostle?” Thereupon Muhammad bin Maslama got up saying, “O Allah’s Apostle! Would you like that I kill him?” The Prophet said, “Yes,” Muhammad bin Maslama said, “Then allow me to say a (false) thing (i.e. to deceive Kab). “The Prophet said, “You may say it.” Then Muhammad bin Maslama went to Kab and said, “That man (i.e. Muhammad) demands alms from us, and he has troubled us, and I have come to borrow something from you.”

The story goes on to say how ibn Maslama deceived Ka’b by badmouthing his prophet and when Ka’b trusted him, he and other Muslims, among them Ka’b’s own foster brother who had converted to Islam stabbed him to death. By denouncing the Quran, Maajid is not doing anything unIslamic. He is taking his deception to a higher level.

The deception has paid off handsomely. Instead of serving time in jail Maajid now shakes hands with George W. Bush and Tony Blair, appears in Bill Maher show and sits next to Richard Dawkins, is a chairman of a foundation, and has run for MP in UK. He is far more effective in destroying the western civilization from within, through taqiyah, than by placing bombs in buildings and buses.

Could I be mistaken? Have I come to a hasty conclusion? I invite Maajid Nawaaz to show my error and prove to the world that he is not deceiving them. Maybe I too will join his Quilliam organization and support his efforts. If he is sincere, he will accept this invitation. But based on my experience with “moderate Muslims,” I have a feeling that Maajid’s reply will be a deafening silence.

There is no such thing as moderate Islam. This is the ultimate taqiyah. This trap is deadly. It may cost your liberty and your life. Moderate Islam is an oxymoron. It is as attainable as perfumed dung; although I may be wrong about the latter.

greygandalf
I have read a book by Laurence Krauss – A Universe from nothing//

And of course by "nothing" he;s refering to the quantum vacuum which is not nothing but filled with electromagnetic waves,particles and anti-particles which would contradict the actual meaning of nothing.
Also,consider this: where and how did the quantum vacuum exist prior to the physical universe?Surely you can see the apparent contradiction in the terms "prior to the big bang" or "pre-existence".It's oxymoronic.

Here we have a typical muslim response – rude, arrogant and aggressive. Not to mention ill-mannered and ignorant. Still we are used to that from muslims, it is the way that brain-dead zombies act, and react.

Should you happen across this, I have read a book by Laurence Krauss – A Universe from nothing. It may not depict what 'existed' before the big bang, but it presents the latest knowledge about the formation of our universe in a thorough, but easy to read manner (not too much maths !). I would recommend this as an introduction to advanced cosmology.

Interesting post to respond to by us posters, if you Modest Muslim, want to engage in a discussion about this article, but with such a post as yours there is little chance of that.

From the article: //"The British and Islamic values are diametrically opposed. They cannot co-exist. The British values are based on democracy. Democracy implies equality. &nbsp;Iranian Journalist Amir Taheri says, “Equality is unacceptable in Islam. Un-believers cannot be equal to believers and women are not equal to men. Even the non-Muslims are not deemed to be equal."//

An IRANIAN is quoted in the article you are supposed to respond to. And Iran is a majority SHIITE country. Taheri must be apostate but he came from a shiite country and he speaks about "Islam".

It is you who claims that "Shiites are already against …." But you did not answer the challenge of the article that Islam is undemocratic because of UNEQUAL treatment before the law of different categories of humans, like men and women, and believers and unbelievers.

You come here, saying that Ali Sina writes "quite moronic", but you do not even address this vital point he makes by quoting Amir Taheri. And both Ali Sina and Taheri come from IRAN, the leading Shiite country.

Sina and Taheri know tons of knowledge and experience about Islam, and especially Shiite Islam.

But you, you answer "quite moronic", arrogantly assuming the writer is confused and studied the Islam represented by the terrorists!

and it is really risible in this context that you dare ask "don't you know we shiites are already against terrorism, conquest for jihad, hating non-Muslims"

Shiite Islam is primarily represented by the IRANIAN leadership, under Khamenei, and that country sure as hell seems to be engaged in quite a lot of terrorism, and it does seem to have the big desire to conquer the world for Islam and oppose the infidels who stand in the way of that,

which is why they hate America (you see; Iran officially hates non-Muslims!) so much that every friday Iranian congregations gathered at the mosque chant "Death to America!". And this is officially initiated by the ayatollah leadership of Iran.

Eiter you are an incredibly ignorant but arrogant person or you assumed, quite precipitously, that Ali Sina and the posters here, were very ignorant about "shiite" Islam.

Oh, shut up, Ali Sina. That's quite moronic. I don't know which Islam you left. I'm a Shia Muslim too but I didn't find anything in Islam like you say. Actually, you are a confused person. You studied the Islam represented by the terrorists and you considered it to be the real Islam. Come on, man. Don't you know we Shiites are already against terrorism, conquest of countries in the name of jihad, hating non-Muslims, fake hadiths etc.

Taqiyyah's not what you described. That's very dumb and foolish, dude. Taqiyyah means to hide to save i.e. hide your faith to save your life. It doesn't mean to deceive a non-Muslim or lie to strengthen Islam. Lying is forbidden in Islam. You can't lie and fabricate hadiths in order to strengthen Islam.

//"Taqqiya is more a way of throwing suspicion on any Muslim who does not agree with the jihadists. Its very effective and its also called poisoning the well."//

As Ali Sina and Phoenix have shown; taqqiya IS recommended by Islamic scholars.

So what should Muslims who claim to be "moderate" do when they are accused of "taqqiya"?
You, as almost all Muslims, deny, deny, deny. But you should acknowledge that the Islamic message, in it's holy texts, is PRONE to all sorts of understandings, therefore at fault. And the fault lies in it's immutability too. Islam's holy texts are very old, written under old circumstances, they are considered divine and immutable.

The best the "moderate Muslims" can do is take these texts "symbolically", "only inspired by God", to be seen to be effective only in ancient times or under very specific circumstances".

But that would result in them getting much verbal and quite possible violent reactions from fellow-Muslims. Lazily, cowardly, "moderate Muslims" seek to influence the perfectly logical reaction of infidels, who are bothered by literal interpretations of Islamic Holy texts, because the infidels will for sure not respond with violence to the moderate Muslims.

The Moderate Muslims should unequivocably COMMIT themselves to democratic laws and societies, AGAINST all totalitarian Muslims. If they lazily, cowardly won't do that, they deserve harsh criticism.

I think most muslims avoid this kind of taqqiya: Because using this kind of taqqiya would mean being free to do what they want, in order to hide their muslimness and they end to like freedom, then they leave islam for real.
That also happened after the crusades in spain. Muslims that survived had to fake cristianity, then after one-two generation, they were Christian… for real.

Namaste Dr. Ali Sina
I don't think that the word 'taqiyah' is derived from Sanskrit word 'Sthag'. Sanskrit is the language of Indian spiritualiy (Sanatan Dharma ). Please don't compare Arabian word with holy Sanskrit word.
India was also victim of barbaric, inhuman Islamic invaders in middle age of 7th and 8th century. Muslims murdered Indian men, children. They raped Indian women brutally. They looted many cities of that time. If Sharia says that limbs of thief should be cut down, then why those looter's limbs were not cut down. These Arabian looters have important position in Pakistan's text book. Do Pakistani not know that these desert barbarians had raped and murdered their ancestors ? Pakistani children are taught to hate Hindus and Buddhist. Hindus and Buddhist are called as uncleaned in Pakistan. They don't dream to grab Kashmir from India but their aim is Islamisation of whole India.
Shahrukh Khan ( Baadshah for very few cinema viewers) says that he is firm believer in Allah. Do he not know that music and dancing are banned in Islam ? In an interview of a renowned international Magazine, he state that Indian Muslims feel insecure since 9/11( Mumbai attack in 2008 waged by Pakistani ISI and Hafiz Said) . The fact is that Muslims are safe in only India. So called King Khan did not pay attention to the death of more that more than 165 innocents including Western tourists. On 9/11/2009 when the whole India as paying tribute to Mumbai police who lost their lives in attack, Shahrukh Khan was busy in entertaining Pakistani people. India is paying a lot since 1947 , the division of India. Indian Muslimsare not loyal to their Motherland. They are typical Muslims.
Sir You are absolutely right . Muslims never be moderate

@Fot
I am sorry this is not flying but vomiting ,in India plenty of half attained sadu's can do really amazing levitation in the atmosphere ,you may baffled with,but don't think Allah ,God ,Iswar helps them ,it is yoga and Pranayama.This Turkish guy unaware of this truth ,but his distant forefather Allwuddin Khilji the sultan of Delhi used to call these semi-yogis to perform levitation to the roof of his palace.Any body who has mastered over the law of gravitation can do this with yogic practice .There are plenty of scripture in Hinduism ,which are dealing with this aspect ,but one should not consider any special thing in it or is Allah's power. Muslims have lost their thinking ability some 1400 years back ,but rest of us have not ,so don't give importance to these crap thinking and demo.

If he is secretly funded by those you have mentioned, are you clairvoyant to know who his sponsors are? How about stopping for once to ridicule in public your poorly developed brain? You think that everybody is acting like Muhammad who did everything for material benefit masqueraded as religion.

Ali Sina is secretly helped aided funded by Zionist Jews Christians and Islamophobes. This website is big conspiracy. All the evidence investigation is out on the internet also being blocked hidden and surpressed by Ali Sina.

@narcole
This is what the tragedy with you follower of that mad Mohammed ,because of fear of death you believe in a crap and weirdo thinking .Remember death is not fearful but the fear of death.After my death how can belief become fact for me ,it remains belief -as it was some 1400 years back hahaha.

@narcole
I swear ,i knew many true spiritual things ,not only from the living scripture but by practicing them through in their practical form.You are not worthy for such higher truth yet for sharing ,if i feel one day that you are on the proper spiritual path, i will definitely share those hidden highest spiritual truth with u. Don't get hurt ,as a good noble woman my unconditional love remain for you .Let wisdom prevail.

@narcole1919721
//Dont forget to list the negative effects from the advanced technology//
All technologies were advanced at the time they were invented. And the negative effect of technology is because of the user of the technology. For example Muhammad used iron/steel for making daggers, spears and scimitars to attack and rob people. That doesn't mean that smelting iron was a 'wrong' technology. Elsewhere people used it to make sickles and ploughs which helped increase in agricultural output.

//Your choice, your responsibility //
True. Unlike the muslims, for them choice is theirs and responsibilities are other's 🙂

You choose what you choose. I choose what i choose. We both were born with same fitrah, the fitrah is given as rahmat from god. But the actualization that will make difference. In alam ruh we already witnessed god. When in life we have that fitrah to actualize. My commitment in islam is my actualization of my fitrah.

I suppose that there are negative effects of advanced technology. But I approach technology with something like book-keeping, it having a debet and creditside. And the positive side FAR outweighs the negative side IMO. As Chuck says; as long as there were humans some sort of technology was around. And the last 200 years, after the Industrial Revolution, the life of the average human increased dramatically! We are now an estimated 16 times as rich as we on average were around 1800. Source: Professor Deirdre McCloskey. Main cause; the liberal democratic system which encouraged trade so much. And also the creativity that caused the great technological progress. And Narcole, HUMANS did that, not Allah, if I may be so bold.

Wow, I am relieved that you are ALSO calling the Iranians "Musyrikin"! Some Muslims here (Surinamese Sunni's) actually support Iran, in their vehement opposition to America, the West, Israel. And the Saudi king-family and many other Muslims they call "Collaborators" (presumably with the West). And behind the West they see "Jews and Freemasons" &nbsp;secretly rule the world and behind Jews and Freemasons they see the "hand, leadership, guidance" &nbsp;of Dajjal.

But I am certainly not Jewish, or a freemason, and I do not do the bidding of Dajjal. And many Westerners are like me. So even if Muslims do believe in Dajjal and Freemasons and some Jews conspiring against Allah, they could still consider

Democracy is effective and OK (like many Turks do), and Westerners could be allies instead of enemies. For instance against the very dangerous and detrimental organised crime organisations.

Westerners are only fallible humans, not conscious followers of Dajjal! Saudi Arabs, according to Al Arabiyah, seem to start to think thus, under the pressure of Iranian nuclear threat.

Sorry, I do not know what is "TAQDIR". And to ask oneself good, interesting questions and then for a time being in confusion is IMO better than not asking oneself these questions at all.

My point is that it was HUMANS who did change the condition of (a?) people. And so HUMANS were and will be capable of changing the condition of people. It seems, by and large, that Liberal Democracy is the best system to let Humans change, improve the condition of humans, people.

you say wise and true enough things here. The point for me is that we should try to hear from both sides of the argument whenever we can.

But we are talking about the trustworthyness of (the writings of) other humans when they tell us something.

I say that we are better off when we read a lot, believe a lot, even if a portion of what we read is false, than we are if we read or believe nothing.

Us listening, reading to what other people say and write, that is a BIG PLUS for me, even if you are right about lies and bias-distortions being scattered throughout what people say and write.

You seem to prefer reading and believing "nothing" or only what your teachers recommend to read and believe. But your teachers are just as fallible as those other humans whose stories and opinions you reject. For you too the distinction between trustworthy and suspect sources is as difficult as for me. And why are you so sure about your commitment to Islam?

And I do hope many humans agree on the great value that it is good to search for the highest truth we can find. And for us to do that, when there are competing theories about important questions, issues, yes, there can be burden of proof for people who make extraordinary claims. Life is a test; that is also an extraordinary claim. We can say to you; No, life just came about and evolved, that's it. And you have the burden of proof for your claim that "THIS life is a TEST".

I think this life is meant to be happy and on aggregate positive for the other humans, so that mankind is happy.

And increasingly we humans could have as goal; 100 years of life of good quality for a large proportion of humans, thanks to health care. With the proviso that a person also him/ herself cherishes the goal of 100 years of quality-life. After 100 years I propose people REALLY retire and live out their life in an easy way.

I say this because I do not want us to rely on the promise of some afterlife. It may well exist, I just say that we humans only rely on the life between birth and death.

Thats in your opinion, based on media u read and heard. Its actually infidel vs infidel case. Which one side pointing out another sides fault, and then another side pointing out the other ones fault. In the end, whats visible is the other ones fault, in order to cover another ones fault from public eyes. Ofcourse that camouflage effort needed some extra stories to convince public so that the focus could run to the other one. Not on the first subject. Its ancient to shut up someone by judging him as delusional so that public wont listen to any truth he would convey.

@narcole1919721
//Why theres term 'last prophet'? Cos the 'end' is near.//
And you, your shiekh and your fellows in the Ummah are making sure that we rush toward that end. Bravo.

//And why the technology comes near the end? //
Technology was always around. The earliest technology were the stone tools, the wheel, the plough. As human need, greed and intellect grew we made newer more sophisticated technological advances.

//So what are you so proud about? //
I can say for my fellow infidels. We are all proud for not being a Muslim 🙂

Significant reply! Eye-opening. I always assumed that it would have been GOD who decided WHEN judgement day would come and that HE would have perfect reasons for the end and it's timing. Now you seem to think judgment day depends on MANKIND's TECHNOLOGY! As if God had to adapt to that! and accept factual human suicide!

Look, history tells us MANY humans thought "ARMAGEDDON" &nbsp;was around the corner. The Jews in Jesus'time seem to have thought this. Since then many boldly proclaimed dates for judgement day. So what you think has been around for 2000 years! But it never materialized! Do you really want to join the list of failed judgement-day-expecters, Narcole? It seems your loved ones want you on it.

But yes, ever since Hiroshima and Nagasaki ( 68 years ago) mankind is able to destroy civilization (but not mankind as a whole I think). But what is our hope? SURELY NOT ARMAGEDDON?! But ….. effective defense weapons against nuclear bombs?!

Tell us, Narcole, are you in favor or against IRAN acquiring nuclear weapons? And why? You DON'T think some humans (like the Ayatollah's) SHOULD BRING ABOUT ARMAGEDDON, DO YOU???

Well, look Narcole, mankind does not need you to reproduce. But if you are going to " reproduce" bear children, are you going to be egoistic and demanding towards your child? I don't think so, but do not limit your childs choices also, by brainwashing it, demanding from it to be Islamic, instead make it your goal to let him/ her choose the best available religion/lifestyle and theories about origine of life, history, whatever they are.

Look Narcole, as far as I am concerned Hitler was bad AND he played false, not to mention that at times he was delusional IMO and wrong with his facts, conclusions and policies. AND his dictatorship, ruthlessness and violence and oppression was ABOMINABLE. What do you think about Hitler?

@narcole
I don't need crap fitrah OK,i already said me a Buddhist and i am happy with it .I do regular meditation and it gives me tremendous happiness.You know there are three kinds of people in this world who will awake in night .They are known as ,'Yogi' ( a person always dwell in meditation and aware of the present),'Bhogi' ( who lives in sensual pleasure like mad Mohammed )and 'Rogi" ( a sick-man due to his sickness). The happiest among them is Yogi and i am an yogi in true a sense ,i do not afraid even death . Forget hell ,heaven and Judgment day keep them in your safe custody,i don't required them ha ha ha.

Then u never knew fitrah concept. That we are born with fitrah to get to know god. In 3alam ruh we already beared witness. read 7:172. And we are given democracy in life to choose which way, which ofcourse, democracy comes with responsibility.

@narcole
We are born out of dust ,our forefathers put cap on it ,but evolution reminded us about our bushman existence ,and now we feel that cloths are man made to hide our modesty (false pride) our real nature is to leave without conditioning and then you will be part of that grand design of creation Now i am doing that and ,i am open to everything without any conditioning's.And if you feel offended then it is your look after and not of me ha ha ha.

@Narcole
Dear don't bring your God in any form here ( only hypocrite and those who are burden on this earth go after it),i am a Buddhist and we do not go after god and after life existence OK,there fore i am enjoying my life to its fullest tilt ha ha ha.I am pity at your present condition,that you are another kind of psycho- who enjoy life in mind ha ha ha, perhaps you think that others don't know your plight ,i hate Islam ,know your plight ,so others ,poor woman take a break or else you will fall pray to lunacy that is definite.

question no.5, if there moslems from different sects fighting, so as quran says, they should do these, except,….
A. try to discuss and find one point to unite
B. make peace for silaturahm
D. reconsiliation for harmony

@Narcole
Dear what is the difference between ,"Sect" and "Human being",who? has created sect and who has created human?. Finally which "Sect" kills which "human" and why that fight persist and who regulate these fights .

@narcole
Dear this is called the process of evolution ,my mind is accumulations of 2000 years of knowledge cherished and preserved and biologically transferred to the next generations(through DNA) by my forefathers .I don't need your certificate OK, you want to know my parents so i gave you little history of my family tree (the wisdom of your Mohammed and his follower your sheik will never have any insight of parents foot dust ,forget about any real wisdom ). We belong to a noble tradition and not from any slum dwellers colony ha ha ha.

Lol no, the exam is in next 2 weeks. im reading kuliah books, one of them is about how to teach kids about islam. so ur question is already written and answered this book. For kids question, of course 😉

No relation to what?
You said you kept reading one thing or the other just as that item appears on the tv or monitor. That means you are receiving inspiration. Is that not the meaning of wahhy ? Any body who is so "divinely inspired" is a prophet. Once a prophet, your dreams become revelations, according to your unholy prophet.

He will appear as a vagabond and to establish that state of joblessness he will kill swine and break crosses.
Will this be done at a central place or the job seeker will move from location to location? What an absurdity!

"WHO KILLING WHO? WHICH SECT?
Sunnis killing shiites and vise versa, then both of them killing the Ahmadis.
"WHO CAUSED IT, WHO STARTED IT?
Muhammad ibn Amina. He said that his followers will split into 73 sects out of which only one would be the right one. Each sect thinks it is the right one while suspecting that the other is misguided. To establish dominance, there is an elimination contest.

@narcole
I am lucky to have good parents and my family genealogy dates back nearly 2000 years.This may perhaps beyond your comprehension .My family do posses scriptures dating back to 2000 years written on perched leafs by our forefathers.If i put them in Sotheby,s for auctions it will fetch me millions of Benjamen's.They are far superior to your Qur'an and older then even first bible print .Just imagine how superior my family from the Quresh of Saudi hahaha.

@narcole1919721
//It seems its you whos confused with the concept. Perhaps, that confusion comes from wrong definition of yours. 🙂 //
Tsch tsch. You are reading about it now and I have read about those two concept long back. Go read some more and this time keep the windows open :-).

@narcole
i am sorry perhaps you may show interest in my aged father ,cause after all you are religiously following that master psycho-Mohammed isn't it.Don't worry he is very strong unlike Mohammed ,even if not 30 horse power i assure at least 1 hp ha ha ha.

@narcole
If the god (Allah) created aqal then why he found it necessary to convey all 'rules of behavior a man should have to follow' , through a messenger.If this Allah created all creature including human ,then why ? he failed to provide 4 pennies to man so that he can indulge in sex with his four wives at time,just think over it.

Hm? fitrh? I am reading book explaining about fitrah now. just when ur writing ur message. And whats funnier, when ur talking about moslems inventions, i was also reading about it also. Another weird thing, i remember another word, then i wrote it on paper and then at the same time ad on tv saying it too. Isnt it funny? Well ask what u like now, i am reading the source 🙂

@narcole1919721
//When god created nafs//
Your confused Allah keeps on creating these to keep his reign intact :-). The problem with the Islamic concept of Nafs is that it is in direct opposition with another concept called Fitr.

//nafsu said as it liked, i am me, you are you.//
This isn't based on Quran or any Shahi Hadeeth. This is from Risala-i-noor. The hadeeth blames Allah of creating Nafs!! It again proves that the ignorance in this world is created by Allah. What a merciful God indeed. No wonder the believer of this cult are so ignorant!!

When god created nafs, nafsu said as it liked, i am me, you are you. Nafsu is symbol of desires include freedom in everything, and denying theres something higher than itself to obey. After that god created aqal, which said, you are my lord, i am your servant. Now. You said you chose aqal? In fact your way is democratic nafs.

If i die, if you die, you will be responsible for your own deeds, i will be responsible for my own deeds. When life ends, the best teacher in front of you is angel of death. All ur allies or friends, family and society wont be there to save you. Only you, and your deeds. the proof is death.

Tsk tsk. You still dont get it? Why theres term 'last prophet'? Cos the 'end' is near. And why the technology comes near the end? Cos the technology itself will result as destruction. So what are you so proud about?

@narcole1919721,
//What makes someone poor isnt the number of kids, but the parents lack of knowledge.//
Spoken like a true fundamentalist. The knowledge the parents' are lacking in this case is that more children implies greater stress on the available resources. Over population is big big problem in countries like Bangladesh. No wonder we see hundreds of thousands of Bangladeshi and Pakistani muslim illegal immigrants coming to the West (and even to India and Burma) and lost. In the new country they adapt quickly, enjoy the relative freedom and then utter expletives against the very country they have migrated!!

Fair enough. But hey, I think that to read history and believe it until an alternative contradicting narrative is presented, after which comparison and choice of which to believe is called for,

is better than

to be so skeptical to believe nothing of what one reads, or to believe only some random parts of it, or to cease reading history altogether or to focus solely on "alternative History"

I think in official history the amount of truth is significantly higher than the lies/ mistakes/ gaps in it.

And I think when compared official history has more proof and logic than most "alternative history", especially "islamic alternative history". And I know that on Internet both of them are explained and compared extensively. Like real and conspiracy-theory of 9/11.

And on which basis do you propose that we choose which theories to believe? If it is NOT on the basis of our beloved religion/ lifestyle and not based on what your loved ones choose.

Democracy, what it entails, and how it is practiced in countries is precisely formulated and monitored and judged by FREEDOM HOUSE. And I know what Democracy is and also that it is well practiced in the West (it is not a phantasy).

The science that I think and talk about, I read in the media, and the journalists read about it in scientific journals or heard about it from scientists.

How come you yourself are rejecting such good sources so completely as you seem to do? What theories can you present that are better than what scientists, journalists and readers present about science?

Don't tell us that your sources claim that THEIR source is DIVINE?! I think it is much more likely that THEIR source is just as human as any other.

Noooo, that's now how I operate. I just say; there is as little proof for some parts of Islam as there is for "Lord of the Rings". And in the absence of proof for parts of Islam, and superior proof and logic for scientific explanations on Islam and it's issues/ theories, I choose the more plausible theories (and NOT the theories I happen to like more, or those my loved ones like more (I hope) as you seem to do).

I am very weak in skepticism, so there is little that I reject immediately after hearing it, as you do so often,

but when two or more theories are presented to explain the same events or situation, then I compare well and choose the most plausible explanation.

I believe the burden of proof is only on someone who has a theory, which has a competitor theory with stronger evidence and logic.

I cannot DISPROVE God or claims of HIS actions by Muslims, but I do believe in alternative explanations of the origine and motivation of the messages of those whom Islam calls prophets. They were just human IMO.

I have no reason to believe God ever sent prophets. But if he did, why did he stop? It was technology that changed the circumstances of mankind so much. One example: According to surveys of early and modern IQ-tests, people on average are nowadays much more intelligent then they were around 1918. This probably is due in large part to education, reading, TV since. So, why does God not now communicate with the more intelligent, better understanding humans?

Why is God, and why are Muslims, content with only the OLD prophets and the immutable OLD texts?! Why are new ones not sent? If this is not necessary or useful NOW, why was it necessary or useful in the past?

Even in Muhammad's prophethood of 23 years adaptations to the holy scriptures were made. Why not since then? Why not AFTER technology was invented?

How long will this situation that Mohammed was the VERY LAST prophet and still no judgement-day, last? Between Jesus and Mohammed there was only a 600-year-gap. Why the 1400-year-gap (and counting) since?

Evidence, not my feeling. Just one solid evidence: in the month of October ,2013, muhammadans killed 979 people in Iraq alone and over 6,000 since the beginning of the year. That is no body's feeling but hardcore fact.

🙂 we are already aware that 2 kids program is infidel program. By brainwashing society that the more kids the more poverty, couldnt make people stop breeding legally and illegally. In islam, the more kids, the more rizq. What makes someone poor isnt the number of kids, but the parents lack of knowledge. Count how many months and days between muharram until eid fitri, that will be always standard for normal pregnancy.

This is the acme of delusional thinking. Sadly all Muslims think like you. A dose of reality may help. Look at Islamic countries. Tell me how many Muslim have won the Nobel prize and compare that to the number of the Jews who have won the Nobel prize.

Who is to judge? Who is to vote? Of course adherents of a religion/ lifestyle are going to say that theirs is the best. But there might be independent judges and juries using sensible criteria, like a religion/ lifestyle having proof of being the truth (a higher truth than alternative theories of it's origine),

and the criterium which religion/ lifestyle makes societies most free, wealthy and happy.

And parts of Islam can be trumped by better societal and personal strategies, we think.

Yes, because acquiring knowledge is good for persons, good for mankind. That was a good command of the prophet. But for creativity, innovation, new inventions the system of Western Democracy is most conducive. The Islamic Khalifate of the Ottomans failed in being creative, it could copy the Western technology to a degree, but it seem to have become the "sick man of Europe" because it could not match the performance and creativity of the Western Democratic system. Seeking knowledge is basically copying, but the people of the West had great creative inventors, they were the originators, not copyers of knowledge. The prophet could have better said: BE CREATIVE, better than just saying "seek" (copy) knowledge (from China).

I am not important, the fate of the child you will raise is. Although you may disregard infidel's advice, the future of one human being may be helped by it, that's what I am trying to do. Two or more persons know more than one. Please choose wisely, not pure dogmatic.

Well, times change, and the number of children the average women is going to get cannot be much more than 2. So THAT difference between man and woman is going to be relatively UNimportant. Especially if the average lifetime will perhaps approach 100 years. What's 18 months pregnancy on 100 years?

Your lord of the rings is your imagination. and you think others also fiction. You have to be able to differ, science-fiction book, science, history, biography, and diary based on true story. Your Democracy is your fantasy. Your science, is science-fiction.

Nacole, Yes it big badly damaged house suffering from too many suicide bombings. And the residents inside from different sects are killing n slaughtering each others with guns n bombs. Many try to run to Europe n Australia in overloaded boats but get drown in the high seas. Wahahahah ! U n your beautiful house !

Peaceful, your words are not worth a penny. You people can lay claims on just anything we're not surprised. We know very well that most Muslim countries were a backward lot. How much have you people advance since the 7th century? How much? You can claim unjustified claims. What proof can show? You can only deceived the ignorant and the illiterates and those whom you people have bought over with your dirty money. What an insinuation! Please be more credible to your words. Do have a sense of shame before making your claims.

As long as religion and politics are not separated, there will be continuing turbulence, wars and killings everywhere all in the name of Islam. There will be no rule of law to be able to control or to overcome this menace. These imposters thought they're doing a favor to right it for Islam. But they're deadly wrong. Their hands are full of innocent blood and it's increasing by the day and dawn with no way of stopping them of the slaughter unless giving up one's own right and yield to their demands of either converting or submitting. This is the only arbitrary religion that calls for force and killings for unbelievers. Can you imagine this? There is not an aspect of freedom in all spheres of life for all humans under this evil banner. Every part of living have been control. Look at its characteristics…It's only evil and hatred that we see. Yet they were so proud and arrogant in carrying out the abominations of what they term as "holy warriors", most courages. But what they do not know or realized is that they were murderers and slaves of Satan who have commanded them and given them the courage to commit this atrocities by the great numbers. It is indeed too horrible and I wonder when they would come back to their human senses and be able to live with others as normal human fellow. They are blinded and self righteous, bigotry in every sense of the word, and divisive. All this have taken a toll on us as we watch through the lens of ours eyes as spectators would watch a game in a ring. They are wild in the eyes of the world and too bad that no kind from among them stood up to speak of these condemnation. Where is justice? Where there's no condemnation, there is no justice. .

narcole, comment on this passage : /There are so many sects in Islam: Sunni, Shia, Ahmadia, Islmaili, Salafi, Sufi, Nizari Wahhabi, the submitters, Nation of Islam, Ibadi, Kharijism, Mahdavi and more. They are fighting each other fiercely and violently. This is not expected in any peaceful society./

Can Islam survive for another 50 years with this infighting n slaughtering ?

Well, I prefer it to say that the time has come for Muslims and their off-spring to REPLACE Islam in them with SOMETHING BETTER. For their hopefully long lives to take as explanation of life and guidelines for live in a moral way that makes them and mankind happier than Islam does.

OK, logical, but as there are many HADITHS, and both "shahih" and untrustworthy ones, the Hadith-corpus is very mixed in trustworthy guiding parts, and deceiving, worthless parts. And a clear all encompassing consensus to which all muslims are obliged to adhere, on pain of expulsion from Islam, has not been reached. So you are always only representing your own version, interpretation of Quran-HADITHS-SIRA, and not that of all Muslims, so not of all "Islam".

//"cos islam is like a beautiful big house that other neighbors jealous of and want to destroy it,"'//

Oh, it could well be that "Islam" is a beautiful big house to many Muslims, with good reason too.

But that could never be the main reason to hang on to Islam. Because another person could argue that " the Lord of the Rings" constitutes a great story and great morals, and for that reason a religion must be grounded on it. With the same right if evidence is provided as much for Islam as for "The Lord of the Rings". And "subjective feelings" are not substitutes for evidence.

As religions can have competitors which also provide great morals, widespread order and happiness etc. it is just not enough for it to be a "beautiful big house"; it has to be true, or better, TRUER, better supported by EVIDENCE than competitor explanations of existence as well as competitor moral systems are.

If you cannot procure better evidence than or even equal evidence to COMPETITORS OF ISLAM; other religions, lifestyles, then at least ADMIT it, that you LIKE it, and that Islam may well be NOT TRUE.

"//Cos the point is, what real islam teaches from one sect as the original teaching, has been modified. And if there any bad effects from the modified fatwa of the 'sheikhs' then people will blame the real sheikh and the original islam."//

I concede this point and can see it has the potential to frustrate and depress you.

But …. if somehow, through Western influence, Islam get's distorted or augmented in a positive way, which for instance make Muslims appear more tolerant, rational, loving than ORIGINAL ISLAM taught, what then?

Will you admit any positive Western influence on Muslims, on YOU? And give credit where credit is due? Just as you always seem so eager to give blame where blame is due?

(Oh, and yes, it IS possible that we counterjihadists credit Islam (or parts or interpretations of it) at good points too less also, but I do not think we BLAME parts of interpretations of Islam too much, that would be very hard to do).

First of all, you have to consider, then explain honestly, which law you prefer if the two contradict each other; the law of the land, or the religious law (OUR law and YOUR law)

If you prefer religious law over national law, when the two contradict, then in a way you become a traitor to your fellow citizens, loyal to your fellow Muslims, even if they are enemies of your nation, it's laws, allies, political system.

While you are perhaps protesting against criticism on you preferring religious law over national law, when the two contradict. But the protesters do have a point and you should concede it. And adapt or move out, in the end.

Hi Narcole, you are talking about PolyGINY, the form of Polygamy in which the MAN takes more than one wife. But how then do you feel about PolyANDRY? The form of Polygamy in which the WOMEN takes more than one husband???

Oh, I know the many objections to that. But my first question is; is there some kind of religious objection? From Islam's Holy texts? Because if there is, that of course will determine the answer to polyandry by you and other muslims. And of course many men will get very jealous when a woman divides her attentions to 2 or more of them.

But there can be huge advantages of polyandry too. For starters, it can be temporary, not lifelong. Then: Spiritually there can be justifications, and I mention the justification that everything that makes people happier, even if only temporary (and life itself is temporary) is motivation to do it, provided it is not against the law.

And: For a period of time in their life many women are adorable to many men; why not sharing the adorable woman then? And: for the women with 2 or more men polyandry can be very satisfying, because it is well nigh impossible for only ONE man to fulfill all her desires, but 2 or more men can fulfill many more of her desires. For instance; the one man can give her incredible sex, but no meaningful and comforting discussion, and the other man can do the opposite. Then there can be the man with the money, the great connections, or perhaps the great humor.

And sooooo many men would get a shot at gorgeous women if these women practiced polyandry, which if they didn't soooo many men would do without.

And as there are many handsome men with multiple relations with women, and the number of men and women being roughly the same, women who have multiple relations with men, would balance an unsatisfactory situation of shortage of women.

In China there are 125 million MEN more than there are women (meaning a surplus of 125 million men) and polyandry could put many women in a very comfortable situation. if her right of choice is respected, which, together with acceptance of polyandry, would give her great leverage over men. Especially in the period of her attractiveness (I suppose from 17 tot well over 35 years of age).

But of course, religion and jealousy will kill almost all attempts to making polyandry more acceptable and customary.

Some houses are actually sepulchers. They appear beautiful outside but the inside is full of decayed matter which oozes unbearable stench. So is muhammadanism which looks beautiful to you. But to the rest of the world, what is in it is nauseating.

The time has come that in the last days of freedom of information freedom of speech and the internet. Islam the religion of the the mad false prophet Mohammed shall be destroyed, collapse and come to an end.﻿

In wisdom lesson, a learned man shouldnt be cocky about what he has learned. Bcos, before he learned, he knew nothing. When he knew nothing, others had already known, even more.Whether its divine or not, fact is fact. Im a woman, and i know im a woman. Eventhough you doubt that im a woman cos u cant see me, the fact will stay the same.

@narcole1919721
//Just wondering why most visitors are indians//
May be because they suffered the most under Islamic rule and then later because of Islamic fundamentalism. The other reason is that Indians are everywhere, there is a huge middle class with good enough access to internet. So I am not surprised if I find that every site has more Indian visitors than any other nationality.

Peaceful, you seem to know nothing of history and totally brainwashed. Or worse; a lying propagator of Islam in the hope other people know nothing of history. Here is Saudi Arabian Ibrahim Buleihi who explains how Arab Muslims especially should really LEARN FROM AND EMULATE from the West instead of arrogantly assuming they are the best and the West should learn from them!http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_zxuMKP_kqg

Did you REALLY think the automobile, airplane, computer, internet, electricity and all those modern techniques were invented by ANYONE OTHER THAN WESTERNERS???

Or if you lied, did you really think ANYONE, even Muslims, would BELIEVE you???

We just deal differently with our lack of knowledge; we accept it, you seek refuge in false security, namely the label "of DIVINE origine" on your most cherished beliefs, it seems to me. But you really do nothing more than gamble, IMO.

This is in response to Narcole, I am sorry if I also criticized my Christian allies. The main criticism on Islam remains it's opposition to Democracy, among many literal interpreters of it's holy texts.

"And i still wanna ask any infidel scientists who deny god. What happened before the bing bang? If they think they are too smart and cocky enough to deny god and what he has done and told."

I am trying to understand your way of thinking here. OK, what if Scientists cannot answer your above question, and further show a modest, humble attitude by saying; there is so much what we do not know, and even what we do know can be replaced by new, better and more knowledge, so we are not sure of anything???

Are you on that basis going to discard their many excellent work and theories, supported by so many facts and logic?

And is that because you think you have some kind of perfect divine knowledge on your side which trumps their knowledge? But we think that your knowledge is NOT DIVINE, that it is only HUMAN, and that, consciously or unconsciously the ones that told you they spoke on the basis of DIVINE knowledge, lied to you or were mistaken.

And you trust them, but you really do not have something solid from them. You know as little or less as we know.

The best example of taqiyah was Mohammed's crazy and desperate little trick where he deceived his own Muslim followers to pray towards Jerusalem (in order to please and gain acceptance as a prophet from the Jews and Christians, he was so desperate to be accepted as a prophet)
But the Christians and Jews were clever they never fell for his cunning little trick and rejected that crazy madman false prophet and never accepted him as a prophet so he turned violent vengeful and hateful towards them and "received" another revelation from "Allah" ordering all Muslims to forget Jerusalem and point their noses towards Mecca when praying.

🙂 the idols were destroyed without anyone touched. are u sure u read from right source? Its quran al isra : 81 which made them destroyed. Prophet didnt destroy them but only pointing a stick as sign .Its god ayat that destroyed the idols.

how come all are bad people are to insult Islam like this all this is because of your bad blood and bad evil teachings only that you learn when are children. Islam is always a religion of peace and allows peaceful coexistance. All the inventions in medical science and other science like mathematics algebra navigations ships and computers internet are come from Islam and all modern inventions printing and machines and history and literateure and philosophy poetry music and archeitecture were all invent and started by Islamic world. What is the other Israeli and western world uncivilized barbarian monkeys do only is make dangerous weapons and wars and terrorism for mass killing of people and media propaganda for posioning the mind of people.

Chuck don't you get it? The fool has run out of arguments so is now resorting to irrelevant questions. As all muslims do. Naw I take that back. Most muslims start using bombs when they don't get their way. Typical really.

Silly spiteful girl. Why don't YOU check, beg allah to come back to life, then tell me all about it? If you can do that for me, I'd be happy to convert to islam! Just so you know, if that's your idea of proof, then you are a sorry excuse for a…oh wait. You said you were muslim. (chuckles) I'd expect nothing less! Your tricks are nothing new (your as in, collective YOUR for muslims) and oh so predictably laughable. 😉 Who told you that joke? Idols were destroyed themselves? haha you seem to be in disagreement with your "fellow" muslims! I suppose YOU are right and all other muzzies are wrong huh? Haha muslims are so delusional!

@slaveofpedophile
Who's Indian? And how is worshipping an idol like a doll, snake or the Sun any different from worshipping something you can't see or prove exists AKA "allah"? Anyone who worships ANYTHING pathetic! Allah is not almighty because he doesn't exist; if he does, PROVE IT. Jesus also believed in some god, Jews believe in some god, muslims believe in some god, other people believe in other stuff. What's common between all these? All are based on no evidence. What's different? Muslims are often more violent and crazed because they take their silly myths too seriously. Like you do.

@slaveofprophet,
//First major enlightenment came in India when Muhammad Ghajani came in India//
The first major incursions date back to Muhammad Bin Qasim's victories in 712 AD.

//when Muhammad Ghajani came in India and and defeat the Indian King Prithvi Raj Chouhan//
Many blunders in one single statement. Here are three: Muhammad Ghaznavi ruled for 5 months only. The infamous Ghaznavi was his father Mehmud Ghaznavi. Mehmud died 120 years before Prithviraj Chauhan was even born.

@non-believer in prophet
Indian people had no idea till 10th century about the almighty Allah. First major enlightenment came in India when Muhammad Ghajani came in India and and defeat the Indian King Prithvi Raj Chouhan who was an Idol worshipper. He destroyed the Somnath temple to teach Indian lesson that Idol worship can not give them any benefit and only Allah should be worshipped. Indian were since ages fond the idols and in temple they had grand idol of Shiva in the Somnath and whole somnath was covered with Gold.

//Indian have no idea till 10th cenutry who is Almighty Allah. //
History tells us that India had a thriving civilization before the middle ages and it started stagnating from around the 10th century. We now know the reason.

Slavementality,
"YOU INDIAN WERE JAHIL IN 7TH CENTURY AND WORSHIPPER OF IDOLS–"
What do you call the one you are worshiping today which was one of the 360 idols in the kaaba? Its name has been modified from al-Lah to allah. Does that change it from still being an idol?

@Lizaveta
You Indian were Jahil in 7th century and worshipper of idols while Arabian people were worshipper of Allah and they used to worship Allah in Kaaba even in 7th century. Indian have no idea till 10th cenutry who is Almighty Allah.

@Demsci,
I agree with you that not all claims can be reasoned out logically, but then not all claims require to be refuted either. But however if the claim is an extraordinary one or a stepping stone to the building of a extraordinary conclusion then a critical investigation is definitely called for. I really didn't want to discuss the methods of AminTheMystic in his absence. He seems to be quite a knowledgeable guy even though his primary modus operandi is to throw as much mud as possible hoping some would stick. The other such guy is Shabeer. The idea seems to be that you would be more busy washing the mud off and the opposition will claim victory!!

Just read an article Jewish Hasbara and wanted to share it here
Hasbara means "explanation", and is also a euphemism for propaganda.Jewish students are trained to edit Wikipedia, and Wikipedia plays ball .
Punch into Google search-
WIKIPEDIA , BIG BROTHER'S PROPAGANDA MACHINE VADAKAYIL Hasbara Trolls are trained to be polite at first. .They target, write, engage, educate and when they fail insult. They will insinuate that you are mad and have forgotten to take your daily anti-madness pills .

They will engage in stages as per their covert blue book.

First stage – Guilt by association, that your source is an established anti-semite.

Second stage – They will give you a golden opportunity to redeem yourself. Such a fortuitous offer to recant from your naive ways and repent.

Third stage : They will go on a vicious smear campaign and insult you.

Last stage : Total character assassination.

They are trained to flag your website which has some deadly virus, so that nobody dares to click and open it.

"islam" is "islam". There is neither original nor fake. The sheiks or shakes who 'pray' (prey) for you are the same ones who will prepare the amulets or charms for you. That was what a muhammadan told me. Asked how the one person can serve God and satan at the same time, he replied that a very thin line separates the two.

Its something that happened in the past long time ago. Eventhough historians speculated this and that, its god who knows more about it. And i still wanna ask any infidel scientists who deny god. What happened before the bing bang? If they think they are too smart and cocky enough to deny god and what he has done and told.

I still respect my other sheikhs until now. But for me, my last sheikh is more convincing and none seems better than him yet. His 3lm level is higher. Wisdom, attitudes, good model, and good influence, charismatic and close to god. His du3a are mustajab, his words have strength and power in moving hearts. Among other sheikhs, hes very respected by them, even to real sheikhs that are known by most people as higher than him, respect him as equal. I doubt that i could find someone better than him. And it will be nightmare if he dies soon. It is really a nightmare for mukmins if ulama die, cos the 3lm will go with them and ignorance or dumbness will spread.You may be right about looking at the message instead of the messenger, sometimes. But in hadith, looking at the tellers also important. Cos if one of the hadith tellers ever lied even once, then eventhough the hadith is true, its hard to judge it as shahih, cos one ever lied once. But if the hadith tellers are all honest, and never ever lied even once in life, then the hadith can be absolutely accepted and shahih.

Amnesia? I already told that muslims and 'muslims, sheikhs and 'sheikhs' not same. Please write clearly, so that not in confusion when accusing who.Im not saying real sheikhs must be far. For example, theres a guy who used to think that hes surrounded by very bad people and always wanted to move. But one day after learning more islam, and listening to advice by hanging out with better guy friends, then he started liking it. He tried to get closer to religious guys and those guys brought him to better places like majlis ta3lim and new sheikhs, then i asked him to move one day then he said he dnt wanna move. Hes liking the religious guys, the sheikhs and majlis ta3lim, he gained more 3lm from them. He said why just met them now? Why hadnt befor long time ago? The conclution is, there are real sheikhs around us, but we ignore. And there are fake sheikhs too, but we easily trust without checking. Even if the real sheikh is far, if theres a will in heart to search for the truth, god will open the way.

Infidels influence? In what? I meant, for example. The law of amulete. Its clear and obvious that amulette is haram in real islam. And real sheikhs ofcourse would give fatwa that its haram. But you can find 'sheikhs' thesedays that learned islam from infidels place (which ofcourse in that infidels place there some muslims and madrasa also), who will give fatwa that its halal. Even tell to use the amulette and trade as business. At first, the followers sell magic rings, and then magic stones, and then babys flesh, quran from blood ink and then mummies flesh, and then fossils for extra ordinary power. N many more. Well u dont need to tell me about your opinion for this. Cos the point is, what real islam teaches from one sect as the original teaching, has been modified. And if there any bad effects from the modified fatwa of the 'sheikhs' then people will blame the real sheikh and the original islam.

Hm? Sheep and goat? If you use sheep and goat for that meaning, hm..idk, let me think…i ever read book that said, dont be like goat who runs here and there, jumps here and there, struggle with another goat with horns, which means being a goat is naughty, greedy, unpeaceful, etc. But be a sheep who eats grass peacefully and walk with calmness.

Thats Your Opinion. In islam, thats cursing, fitnah, lies, dirty and not honorable. While in my opinion thats even immature.About old people, im still holding onto sheikhs advice. But ofcourse, wise old people could take young persons advice with big heart, but many old people are too cocky to listen to younger ones cos they think their age is longer and they think since they have more years in age, that means more experiences. But in fact there some old people who live long but didnt do things as many as the young already did and doing.

Sheikh told that lecturing, advising, or teaching someone needs certain requirements. Cos its balaghah. Balaghah needs 3lm. Persons who have 3lm balaghah know how to transfer information effectively without negative effect. For example, if a little son climbing a tree, there a mother will react by saying, hey you dumb! Get down! Or you will fall!. That balaghah is wrong. A simple better way is by saying, "oh my dear son, hold on the tree thightly, make sure you really hold it well. be careful, okay? " And if the mother wants to give a lesson, not by letting him fall and then say, "didnt i say before not to climb the tree? Now take that. This is cos you didnt listen to me" but a smarter mother would stand near the son while letting him climb and supervising him and makes sure he gets down safely. And then to give him a lesson the risk of falling is by showing an example from other persons experience, let him see the other boy falling from tree and then get injured cos not listening to his mom.

Thats according to YOUR law. But according to OUR law, do whatever you want as long as not bothering others. If you want to climb a tree, talk to wall, eat soil, thats ur business. But it will be our business if you climb our tree and break our tree, if you talk to ur wall loudly and create noise until our house, and if you take soil from our land. You may think what you do legal, while to us its illegal. You have your own judge, we have our own judge. If you dont want to choose peace, but conflicts instead, then blame yourself for the karma.

Hm, here you go again with old statement. Muslims, muslims, muslims. Which are muslims? You mean, muslims vs 'muslims'? Its an old topic that those 'muslims' are actually infidels. And infidels think 'muslims' are muslims. Its very obvious ur in confusion how to differ. Muslims know how to differ which are muslims and which are 'muslims'. And you, infidel, if still confused, ask real muslims how. Not ask 'muslims'. Clear enough?

For example sina or mr chuck, they are old, but curse like kids. I must not curse them eventhough i want, cos my sheikh and prophet banned. //

Actually,Ali Sina is middle aged not old but even if he was old,how would that invalidate his arguments against the aged Muhammad who cursed worse than a kid and had sex with a kid.And how do you know chuck's age,I don't recall him mentioning it?It 's pretty obvious you've reached the limits of your ability to use rational argumentation and so instead of attacking the argument you attack the arguer.That's called ad hominem,a fallacious method of reasoning.Grow up,read a college text book on logic and/or philosophy on how to construct a valid argument then come back and play with the big boys.

Thanks for that challenge, Narcole. But I am rather too naive than too "paranoid". I believe people of all possible creeds/ lifestyles. In fact, I look at MESSAGES, instead of at Messengers. This could easily mean that I believe a Muslims message over an infidels message if the two are on the same issue and contradict each other and I find the Muslims message more convincing.

I only doubt people, and theories, when a better theory about same issue is presented.

How is your attitude? Do you focus on message instead of on messenger? Can you on some issues prefer the message of an infidel over the message of a Muslim? Or even over the message of your "sheikh"?

&nbsp;"After that my sis from far place called me, and asked what sheikh said, when she heard that she couldnt deny that its true. My elder sis also kept searching for 'sheikhs' but often met fake sheikhs and got fooled there in her place…her husband also got fooled many times too..hes skeptical and never met my sheikh but he trusted my sheikh from what sheikh has done to us."

Is "sis from far place same as elder sis" if I may ask? Thanks for admitting that there are fake sheikhs among Islam-teachers. Perhaps the more radical, anti-democratic ones, are fakes?! But how can you distinquish the "fakes" and the genuine good teachers? I can imagine that these experiences make you more, how to say it, "open", seeing things less rigid, more flexible, understanding towards other people.

And if genuine good Islam-teachers are few and far between, then you and the genuine teachers and their followers could well understand how unique you are among Muslims. And so also that sometimes you should side against other Muslims and with infidels. And also that is NOT a good thing if Muslims gain absolute world power, since so many have been "fooled" by fake teachers. So that might leave democracy as the best societal system for Muslims like you.

" Sheikh said, now many sheikhs around us, but did u know where they learned islam from, from infidels countries, or infidel cities. Most islam knowledge from infidel places in doubt cos mixed. They may be from islamic countries or from arab decendants, but where did they learn their islam knowledge?"

Very interesting. If the Sheikh would have meant only that the precise meaning of Quran-Hadiths-Sira may well get distorted by some Islam-teachers, I can see that.

But, if the Sheikh means that infidel influence is all bad and to be avoided, that's what I don't like in his (her?) attitude.

I mean, it is one goal to study pure Islam, but infidels, like Islamologist professors, do it too. But is an entirely different goal to seek wisdom, best guidance, both for one's own life, and for mankind's sake. And is Islam necessary for that? We think there are many very good competitors who help for that sort of goals.

Hi Narcole, OK, I accept that it also is like being a sheep if one follows other people and the internet at random.

I now see that you are very serious and critical in choosing your inspirational guides. and of course learning from and following good teachers is a good thing.

I am sorry that I said you seemed like sheep, I now think you are more like the opposite. And in a DOHA-conference a few years ago, the distinction was presented of: People like Sheep (followers) and People like Goats (more intelligent independent thinkers). And you now seem more like a goat to me. As many posters here.

"For example sina or mr chuck, they are old, but curse like kids. I must not curse them eventhough i want, cos my sheikh and prophet banned."

I don't agree that Ali Sina and Chuch curse like kids. What do you think cursing means? They use valid reasonable and legal method of discussion and are fully prepared to take what they give.

If THAT is cursing to you, then you should not be "banned" to do the same IMO.

And I think reasonable confident OLD people should take with grace anything a young, eager person verbally throws at them in the form of questions or challenges. But they are under no obligation to respond to anything, not even to listen to anything of course.

"The soul of a mukmin will be hung between earth and heaven after he dies for certain days if he ever hurt someones feeling without appologies."

Of course this sounds great. And I would like to follow such advice almost always. But …freedom of speech can be very useful in correcting and alerting people, and also in response to very cruel, greedy, criminal or stupid deeds, policies. And chastizing people who commit them, can and often is INTERPRETED as insulting by the criticized and by those who like them and are like them as well. And so, they may claim that "their feelings were hurt". But was the criticism on them, even when very harsh, not still useful and valid? Especially when the criticizer would be fully prepared to let the criticized be equally harsh in return, and let his/ her own feelings be hurt as well? And many criticized people also can decide that their feelings are not hurt by any charges and insults. and they can ignore them or argue back.

And so, when someone's FEELINGS are HURT, that must be allowed, under reasonable circumstances, and up to borders. But it is absolutely unacceptable to HURT BODIES.

Interesting reply. Your sheikh says good things. Perhaps he is also in favor of the Golden Rule? Are you?

He said that the Muslims should try to teach the murtadh more about Islam. But what would he advise when the Murtadh, in democratic free speech fashion, keeps up active opposition to Islam? I mean, many of us infidels, and the murtadhs also, DO accept active opposition to our own religions/ lifestyles.

We think: Let the best religion/ lifestyle win. In honest competition. After all, after 2 generations old religions can be forgotten and new ones customized and loved. and after all, Islam itself DID win over other religions, and the people who lost religionwise must have regretted that very much too. So why do Muslims want to give Islam more rights and chances than other religions/ lifestyles? Because that's how it seems to me.

Hi, Narcole, I am actually glad to see you and now also the Saudi Press admit and emphasize that for Muslims it is NOT OK, to prefer all those who proclaim to be Muslims over all infidels and support them on the grounds of them being of the Ummah.

But instead the Saudi press now implicitly admits that it is often better to oppose self-confessed Muslims and in some conflicts even take the infidel, even Jewish, side!!! Against fellow-Muslims!!!

Anyway; don't Muslims fight and kill other Muslims in Syria and elsewhere, in the process getting support from infidels (like the Russians) and siding with them against the other Muslims?

Daniel Pipes explained that he was against war, but if there was to be war, he would prefer Muslims to fight each other over Muslims fighting infidels. But my real point is that I hope that SOME Muslims can somehow interpret Islam so symbolically that they can genuinely be in favor of Democracy and be on the Democratic side against any and all Totalitarians. So I am in favor of Democratic Muslims. Who resist Totalitarian Muslims and fight WITH Democratic infidels. But many say there cannot exist such a thing as "democratic Muslims".

Hi Chuck, awesome reply, pondered it deeply. Yes your "attacks" are very reasonable and honourably. Attacking your posts and somehow calling them "mischief" is going against the high values of freedom of speech (if posts like yours get criminalised) and searching for the highest truth, for oneself, opponent and readers.

But about: "In the absence of evidence such outlandish claims are nothing but lies". Remember AminTheMystic? He used to throw sentences like that in OUR FACE, especially against Ali Sina. I responded with charging him with "Argumentum ad Ignoram" and the fallacy of the Stone (or similar wording).

You see, people cannot provide evidence for everything they claim all the time, that would become very tedious. And if someone claims something, without presenting evidence, then it also a logical fallacy to conclude that the claim must be false and the claimer must be lying. Bertrand Russell it was I believe that said that even a statement like: "There is kettle orbiting in space behind the moon" could not be PROVEN false!

It seems to me that the emphasis should be on "outlandish" or "extraordinary". When claims seem to be that, then almost always there are claims that compete with those claims, that are much more likely, and an observer then can choose the more likely and logical claim about the disputed issue.

I hope you get my drift. I want to follow your method, but AminTheMystic used it abundantly and vehemently against Ali Sina, and many of us. It was his ground for calling us LIARS and DISHONEST very often. Can you clarify where he was right and where he was wrong in relation to the most valid and civil method of argumentation?

To you killing one or a few innocents is okay, cos u see it from quantity. If you have 2 kids, and someone killed one of ur kids, u would only revenge him half of punishment? By taking half of his life?

Narcole, you DID write that Fitnah was MORE SIN than killing humans! That's pretty serious and weighty. And it was a clear thing and I did not twist your message here. So how did I do "fitnah" to YOU with this particular post?

My question: You seem so impervious to endless, often very harsh, anti-Islamic, and often personal degrading comments (though not by ME), and now you consider one more oppositional reply FITNAH? Why???

It seems to me that you simply are against the principle of free speech. Either you don't understand it or you don't respect is as completely as most of us do. Does your attitude originate from your Islam?

I think that if you differ in opinion with us about freedom of speech, that is of the same magnitude as we differing in opinion from you about Islam. And YOU, in a way, are doing FITNAH to US too. Only for us, your FITNAH is completely legal.

Sheikh said wherever theres white part of eyes, there always other color part of the eyes. Wherever there hero, there also bad guys. But sheikh suggests me to live in place where many more 'heroes' than bad guys. Which means purer place. Prophet Muhammad was sent to jahilliyah arabs. Cos at that time the bad guys reached the peak moment. So thats when prophet came as hero. So i still disagree with slave of prophet that all arabs are the best. Hero with pure hearts are the best. Not the race. If there non arabs who respect arabs so much, thats not cos arabs are the best, thats only cos the best prophet and sahabat were born there among jahil arabs. Like in quran said, bani israel 'were' the best at the time in the past. cos among jahil people at that time, many prophets were sent.

About my sheikh, hes not my first sheikh. Hes my last sheikh until now. Our last meeting also discussing about my relatives 'sheikhs', my sheikh and my other sheikhs. Wow..they all are called sheikhs…which one real sheikh? Sheikh explained how to differ real sheikhs and ones who are only called 'sheikhs'. First, where the sheikhs came from, and where the sheikh learn 3lm from. Sheikh said, now many sheikhs around us, but did u know where they learned islam from, from infidels countries, or infidel cities. Most islam knowledge from infidel places in doubt cos mixed. They may be from islamic countries or from arab decendants, but where did they learn their islam knowledge? I asked sheikh one of fake sheikh of my relative came from same place like my sheikh and from same madrasa. Sheikh said. He ever had a room mate when in dormitory. Sheikh always attended majlis ta3lim from morning until night, but his room mate went the same time and went home the same time, but to different place. He learned black martial arts . They finished n back to society but now the mate is dead cos defeated by stronger opponent. Sheikh said, eventhough someone called a 'sheikh' from certain madrasa, check, how many total days n hours in a year he attended the majlis ta3lim. How many years, and did the great teacher tested and supervised him directly and approved him and let him graduate from the madrasah. Sheikh also said real sheikh is special. Like the great teacher/sheikh of sheikh, sheikh witnessed himself directly the miracle when he walked behind him. And ofcourse many other miracles. And now sheikh asked to me. You have been with so many sheikhs, include me, which ofcourse there some contradiction from our teachings. And ur confused how to differ, now im asking, from all ur sheikhs that u ever met, which that could make u ~~~~ and bring ~~~~ also ~~~~ (well im not gonna tell what this ~ means, cos its very privacy about my past that only me n that know and experienced, even if i write here, none gonna believe). Who else could do that to you…didnt god already answer who from these? Which of those sheikhs with same things? After that my sis from far place called me, and asked what sheikh said, when she heard that she couldnt deny that its true. My elder sis also kept searching for 'sheikhs' but often met fake sheikhs and got fooled there in her place…her husband also got fooled many times too..hes skeptical and never met my sheikh but he trusted my sheikh from what sheikh has done to us. Well, let the sheikh for us and let us believe only. Thats enough. Telling with words not enough. There differences between hearing and seeing, seeing and experiencing, and believing and knowing. At first my bf didnt really believe either in my sheikh, he even didnt live in religious islamic way. But now hes a religious guy. My sis and bro werent religious either, now more religious. My sheikh is for me, cos i learn from him directly. My sheikh isnt for you, cos you dont learn from him directly. Remember one of the requirements is by not learning alone without supervision. I actually think believing random articles and translations from internet and didnt check or meet the sources, is more like a sheep. Cos what internet could prove? You could find on net that drinking cold milk when having fever is good but on other site you could find its bad. What could internet prove? What even someone in dream or talking parrot could prove? Sheikh said, must meet the real human, real body, directly. Sheikh also warned to be careful with news on tv and newspaper. Its brainwash media, and there someone behind the scene. Also cautious of good kitabs from suspicious translators. Also sheikhs from suspicious place, and no change nor good effect to life.

Well there some cases of apostasy sheikh just talked. A man came to sheikh and said he just killed a murtad by burning the man and the house. Sheikh asked, why did you kill him?? Did you talk to him before you do that? The man said, no. I was too mad, cos hes brainwashing madrasah students that our people sent to him for islamic 3lm. But he turned them to murtad instead. We burned him as a lesson. Sheikh said, you cant be like that. Give him a chance. Teach him more about islam, guide him back. Klling a murtad without asking him to do taubat and guide him with more 3lm, the sin is like destroying half ka'bah. And killing an innocent man is like destroying a whole ka'bah. Even killing innocent dog is haram. Killing innocent animals too. Unless if they harm you. But for example if a worm harms you, if possible, dont kill it. Just take it and move to other place. Even, us, mukminin, are haram to hurt humans feelings. The soul of a mukmin will be hung between earth and heaven after he dies for certain days if he ever hurt someones feeling without appologies. Even for example your case, with ur relative…ur leaving them for hijrah for god, but u cant leave them just like that without attitudes. U came with takbir, u leave with salam. Do ur hijrah in nice way, without making them feel hurt. Still be nice. well, i also remember sheikh told to respect old people, eventhough they are wrong, eventhough they talk harsh, eventhough they hurt, should still treat them nice and dont treat them like they treat to us. I also remember that should debate with infidels without any bad words that could hurt the feelings. I also remember imam 3ali almost late to do sholat, cos there an infidel old woman walking very slow infront of him and hes afraid to walk infront of her cos in hurry for sholat. For example sina or mr chuck, they are old, but curse like kids. I must not curse them eventhough i want, cos my sheikh and prophet banned. Even to my parents that sometimes disobey islamic teaching. Sheikh told me not to lecture them, cos if a young one lecturing old ones, the berkah of 3lmu will be gone. And i heard that if the old ones deny what the young says cos of their pride of age, then the point of hakikat wont be raised in there, but it will be more about denials and the bad effect to the deniers is la3natullah. The position of a teacher in religion is higher than the position of parents. A curse from teacher is faster than a curse from parent. For example my dad cant read quran with tajwid well, i know tajwid better. The solution is not by teaching my parent, but bringing a teacher for him or buying e-pen of quran with tajwid. Or give him tajwid app that already checked and verified correct for him to learn. Shudnt make him feel low coz being taught by young kid. Even if god cursed parents as pig or dog, the child should still take care of them and treat them well. If parents say something must not said 'ugh', and if they tell to do wrong, shouldnt refuse with bad words or loud voice. So if u think fighting with harsh words is right, ur wrong.

Theres one part of body, if that part is good, then other parts will be good. Its qalbu. If qalbu is good, body will be good. If qalbu is good, mouth and tounge will be good. If qalbu is good, actions will be good. Take care of qalbu well, if want zhahir, bathin and life good. Theres no doubt that anyone with bad mouth doesnt have a good heart. Thats how to judge a bad heart. But to judge a good heart is more difficult, cos there hypocrites, fitnah and negative thinking infront.

In saudi arabia…their islam…they who? The government, the people or the 3ulama? Those three disagree to each other, but they have to 'adapt' to each other since they are in same boat. If one makes a hole, others who're not guilty will sink together too.

Indeed I know that difference, Narcole. It is also the difference between verbal fighting and physical fighing in a a way perhaps. You see, the judgement of only a bad "heart" does NOT make a person guilty. It is only the bad deed that makes a person guilty, if convicted. The bad deed can be proven in many cases, but who judges, let alone proves, the bad heart?

Remember, if it is legitimate to judge bad hearts, infidels can judge the heart of Muslims bad also. So please adhere to the Golden Rule about the heart; if you do not want to be judged and punished for having a bad heart (according to others, not you) then do not judge and punish others only for having "bad hearts".

".grrr…so far i just could move back to another place for hijrah..place here isnt pure anymore…many mushrikin….and munafiqin."

Listen, Narcole, you are unique, or at least in a tiny minority, with your personality, and your beliefs. nowhere on earth will you find a surrounding that is "pure" in the sense that you mean it, not even in Saudi Arabia.

Perhaps you would be better of living among people like Chuck and me and the other infidels.

thanks for the reply chuck, I appreciate this "scholarly" response! Yes, I agree with the the oral traditions. And anyway, SCROLLS or clay-tablets COULD have been written, because Cuneiform and Hyroglyphes did exist from before 3000 BC.

Good of you to remind Muslims how ARROGANT Mohammed or his biographers were about him, in contrast to the biographers of the Israelite prophets, who nevertheless were adopted by Mohammed as part of his doctrine.

Narcole, if you really search for the truth, you must be prepared to accept that those you love and respect and who support your current lifestyle MAY sometimes err or even lie, while those you don't like MAY speak the truth, give you the more truthful answers.

Sometimes, on some issues, you can not have BOTH your loved ones be in agreement with you and you finding to the highest truth you can find and then you must choose between your loved ones and the highest truth.

And your loved ones, knowing they are but faulty human beings, should not arrogantly demand from you to always agree with them on everything and only reading and believing what they write, say or approve.

I so hope you somehow will be held accountable for abdicating your responsibility, to find the highest truth you may well have been supposed to find, to those loved ones. You seem like a sheep to me sometimes.

I have the grave suspicion that you, and many Muslims, consider fighting Islam not only as physically and in agression fighting Islam (which then is defended by also physically violent Muslims) but that you also consider MERE ARGUING, MERE EXPOSING ISLAM, with nothing but words, as "fighting Islam".

If that is the case you are in grave opposition to democratic law, which guarantees freedom of speech, up to the border of inciting violence.

Would you or would you not support violence against infidels (including apostates of Islam) who only and purely "fought" verbally and NOT violently, NOT with incitements to violence either???
Would you only support fighting back VERBALLY ONLY (against ONLY VERBAL fighting of Islam)? As those on our side (almost) all would if their religion/ lifestyle was fought verbally only)?

@Demsci,
I on the other hand do think that one person or an identity of multitude of persons may have been called Abram in Bible. Although you are right about the alphabet being a necessary tool for writing the various accounts of Bible down, but there might have been a oral tradition (which isn't hard to imagine) predating it by a few centuries. One of the most decisive reason why I think this way is the Bible itself. It glorifies God but presents its prophets as very fallible beings. Pretty normal human beings, other than their being a prophet. This is very unlike, say Quran where not a single verse in praise of Allah doesn't have a reference of the favourite apostle, Muhammad, too. In other words the 'heroes' of Bible are very much human, displaying very down to earth, raw and, at times, even, anti-social behaviour. Such, often, unheroic, less than flattering reports go against the basic notion of hero worship. In fact this even prompted scholars to study Biblical accounts from a purely psycho-pathological point of view. So to me it appears that these were real persons (or multiple persons identified as one, or even their accounts mixed up a little), with real concerns about their tribe or nation. Whether or not they also had prophetic visions is a matter of belief.

Well, Slave of Prophet, according to Al Arabiyah, published and read much in Saudia, it is now said that Iran is a warmongering country and very dangerous, TO Saudia. It is also said there that Al Quaida and Taliban Muslims are terrorists and misunderstanders and abusers of Islam. Saudia also takes a stand AGAINST the Muslim Brotherhood, and is in favor of General Al-Sisi and most of the Egyptians.

Now, are you prepared to also discard the Ayatollahs of Iran, Al Qaida, Taliban and the Muslim Brotherhood as your allies and fellow Muslims???? are you with Israel against Iran, on the issue of Iran obtaining nuclear weapons, as the Saudi's REALLY are???

@Evil_slayer,
May be you are right. But where is the harm in trying? At least the readers of this discussion have seen, even if only a repetition of other similar discussions, how things pan out whatever little value it may have in substance!!

There simply is NO INDEPENDENT confirmation that Abraham even existed from any other sources than the Jewish ones. No other sources mention Abraham.

Jews, being of the Judaic religion, wrote the bible-books, with Abrahams story in it, from the 6th to perhaps the 2nd century BC. Besides many of Islam's prophets were Israelites; like Daoud, Solomon, Yunus, Isa.

Oh, yes, Islam has massive Jewish origines. It would not exist were it not for the Israelites and their preservation and success of their religion. And it would not exist without the alfabet, without which (holy) books cannot be written. And in Abrahams time the alfabet was not yet invented.

Abrahams time is estimated to have been from around 2100 to 1700 BC. In the bible there is the story of the 4 kings fighting against the 5 kings and Abraham rescuing Lot from the 4. And one of the 4 kings was AMRAFEL, king of Sinear (North Iraq). Some historians speculate that Amrafel was the famous Hammurabi, considered to have ruled from 1792 to 1750 BC. If that is true, then we know Abraham lived in that time.

Due to the mischief (FITNA) and threat coming from so-called "Islamists', "extremists" and in particular from Iran's ayatollahs (who are now very close to an atomic bomb), the Taliban (shooting Malalah) and Al Qaida and their likes(misbehaving in Syria, Nigeria, Kenya and elsewhere), and also the miserable performance of the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt,

In Saudi Arabia also they now differentiate between " their Islam" and "misunderstanders and abusers of Islam". I read this on Al Arabiyah. There, the Saudi's now admit being in accordance WITH ISRAEL on the issue of the Iranian nuclear threat.

Consider third parties, readers, perhaps Muslims who doubt and think, and who have had bad experience with other Muslims, who used Islam as excuse for oppressive, erratic behavior, there must BE SOME, and hopefully Chuck is influencing at least some of them in a positive way, as I trust he has done often in the past!

When you compared Islam with Judaism and Christianity on the issue of the followers of the 3 religions taking their holy texts very literally, as texts directly from God, or, in contrast, more "symbolically", "allegorically" and as texts only INSPIRED by God,

you acted logically, OK.

But I disagree with your conclusion and agree with Ali Sina's conclusion. Albeit in the sense that vast numbers of Muslims seem to take their holy texts literally and directly from God, rejecting more "symbolical" interpretation (which is so badly needed for adaptation of Muslims to democratic societies). While only small unimportant parts of Jews and Christians do the same.

And had you considered that among humans there are also many, many atheist, darwinist, hindu, buddhist and various other people, and also Jewish and Christian people, who certainly do not take ANY text literally and coming DIRECTLY from God,

you would have realised that you committed the Tu Quoque fallacy, by trying to excuse, exonerate Muslims (in big numbers) by pointing out that followers of other religions ALSO interpreted holy texts literally, as direct quotes from God (although only a tiny minority of them does this). I think this is what Lonelyloner meant.

Anyway, I take it that you too agree with Ali Sina, that it is simply WRONG OF MUSLIMS

(at least for those adapting to democratic society (which Ali Sina and us believe is a better system for humans to live in than the shariah system of literal Islam))

to have Islam as their religion and take their complete holy texts literally as directly coming from God, without exception, trumping any contradicting other human laws, guidelines.

Please at least agree with Ali Sina and us that the "symbolic", "inspired by God" interpretation of Islamic Holy Texts by Muslims is to be preferred over this problematic, dangerous, detrimental LITERAL, "DIRECT QUOTED FROM GOD" Interpretation of Islam's holy texts by Muslims.

Because that's really important for us to hear from a Muslim, instead of the usual Tu Quoque-style diversions.

Oh my dear mr chuck…im used to su2u zhon from others. In the end, time will tell the truth about the zhon. ur my no.3, remember? After that no.4, ofcourse. im careless about ur accusations, my focus is on the no.3. So speak bad as u like, i wont go to no.4 before i finish the no.3 😉

@narcole1919721
//Dont say good bye and ask me to leave. Im still here, waiting for ur tendency in peeling ur own claims//
Stay put. Your claims have been thoroughly peeled:-). You would keep on with this mumbo jumbo without actually responding to the original posers. I never doubted THAT ability of yours :-). I bid you bye from this particular thread. It doesn't mean that on another occasion in some other thread I won't attack more of your fallacious claims. People following this particular thread now know that at least 3 of your claims in this thread have been put to test and found to lack critical content because of lack of evidence:
1. That Muhammad is a direct descendent of Abraham,
2. That many discoveries by infidels are based on borrowed knowledge from earlier Muslim discoverer who possibly discovered these based on their Quranic studies.
3. That there is any convincing argument in seeing Allah written in Arabic on the back of a person's right hand, without also finding a similar 'artistic' interpretation for a dog's testicle or any arbitrarily drawn 3-4 adjacent lines.

Dont say good bye and ask me to leave. Im still here, waiting for ur tendency in peeling ur own claims and other infidels claims. whatever u think about me, its okay, we'll see later. but im sooo willing to see ur tendency.

If a muslim is mad toward a muslim and silent for more than 3 days, then all of his good deeds will be rejected by god. If he talaq me, ill let him marry again. And then he will realize no other women better than me and then he comes back to me and i forgive him. About age, in my family from my age im supposed to be married now. But to his family, its still soon 😉

My bf is very unique. His heart, his attitudes, and other things about him are very unique. I dont need to tell details cos ull get jealous and chase him. I want a baby from his blood ofcourse cos i want a kid that will do the same like he does, and with heart as soft as his, and mind as smart as his. Like father, like son. And ofcourse until now i already had foster kid. He was cute when baby, but his father was a very bad guy who left him. In the end the kid has become naughty like his dad. I also has nieces that so cute, beautiful and funny. But sometimes they act like their dad, which something i dislike. U cant get my bfs uniqueness anywhere.

@ slaveofprophet
hey slave boy. allah is a false god so why would it matter which country he liked? when saudi runs out of oil, they will recall how worthless they really are. I'm not saying they're completely without potential, but as long as they keep worshipping the false god allah AKA pedo muhammad, they will rue the day muhammad was born. You guys defend that giant cube called kaabah so much, its akin to worshiping. Answer this: why did muhammad have to use force to destroy the idols in the kaabah? Why didn't allah just do it? Because he wanted power over meccans. The kaabah is reminiscent of islam's bloody history. FYI only slaves like you agree to your daft statements. 🙂

What if he stays mad longer than 3 days? Does he say talak 3x and abandon you? He might you know. Hey and your pedo prophet also "married" a 9 year old. Maybe your co-wifey can be a 9 year old girl too! Just go move to a sharia practicing "nation" and see if you can bring yourself to it. Knowing how you condone evil acts, I suspect you actually might.

Oh you can't read paragraph format? Here are my accusations/questions in list format.
1) Why did muhammad rape a 9 yr old child named Aisha? This is the work of a pedophile. If you say he "married" her, that is just as disgusting. Explain why he didn't refuse, or at least "beg" allah for forgiveness that he couldn't bring himself to such a repulsive act.
2) Why does he condone beating wives lightly? This is the work of a barbarian.
3) Why does muhammad think islam is the ONLY way to go? People from all walks of life are surviving and are much more successful w/o the evils of islam. This is the thinking of an ignorant bigot.
I don't need to go to your profile, if you have an answer for these questions, you can try to answer them right here.

Either way the kid would not be yours. Is your "man's" blood different from anyone else's blood? How superficial of you! You just don't get what an evil cycle islam is do you? Even knowing your "man" slept with another woman, you would insist on him doing so for the sake of a baby (which is not yours anyway). Yet you wouldn't be interested in a simpler and honorable way of getting a baby by ADOPTION. See how many vices you are committing? You encourage your "man" to sleep with another woman, you think your "man's" blood is special (are you superstitious?) and you want all that instead of simply adopting a kid and raising him/her with your "man". You cannot be fixed I'm afraid! Islam's twisted ideology has entrapped you too deeply.

//And when will you answer mine, at least show abit tendency to answer? Never ever?//
Which ones? I told you when I will answer you (and even what kinds of question I will answer).

//Im fine if you keep cursing me with all ur accusations which god and me myself know about the truth. Go on.//
Don't make simple things difficult and circuitous. I asked for proofs to your own claims on this very thread. I don't ask about your bf, or about which sect you belong to, or which part of the world you live. What you know to be true may indeed be false and it is.

//Id like to thank you for peeling back the layer of taquiya (lies in attacking islam). And promoting the concept of tabayyun from both sides. also for describing well the teaching of ur nameles god, that bad mouth comes from dirty heart. Your nameless god also teaches u to debate without attitudes. //
You are welcome. I would have been happier if you had understood that your false propositions stand exposed. But wait, I think you already knew that!!

//I know ur next reply, none about you and your claims right. Its okay.//
I am asking about your claims on this thread. Leave it, it is clear now that you can't defend your positions and are now making emotional appeal. I let you go. Bye.

@Narcole
It is dream of every non-Arab Muslim to have birth in prophet land & Allah most favourite country i.e. Saudi Arabia. Why Allah chose only Mecca to have his house i.e. kaaba because Allah know Suadi Arabian people are best people of world.

Id like to thank you for peeling back the layer of taquiya (lies in attacking islam). And promoting the concept of tabayyun from both sides. also for describing well the teaching of ur nameles god, that bad mouth comes from dirty heart. Your nameless god also teaches u to debate without attitudes.

And when will you answer mine, at least show abit tendency to answer? Never ever? Will keep asking me? Will keep commenting me? Im fine if you keep cursing me with all ur accusations which god and me myself know about the truth. Go on. But once again how about you? Arent you perfect example for the man who point his finger toward other person, but ur own fingers pointing at urself? oh, wait. I know ur next reply, none about you and your claims right. Its okay.

Isnt it funny that if i answer where, ull ask me to mention each, and then the year, and then the wives, and the the fathers and grandfathers? Why.. is it cos of age, cant be independent to solve from clues? Well, in my education major, its prohibbited to peel the fruit for student and eat the fruit, then give peeling. if u wanna help a poor jobless man, shudnt give him fish everyday. Give him fishing tools and teach how to fish.

@narcole1919721,
//Its funny that u never heard of new york hall of science and never visited it. Why dont u go there and see with ur eyes the inventions from A to Z. I only laughed when u kept asking for that//
I may not have. But isn't it more funny that you couldn't list down some of your own? Especially when you boasted that the infidel discoveries were actually muslim discoveries.

//Its really funny that i my self know and see the proofs myself and u still say wheres the proof, u wanna see, but u dont wanna open or visit urself.//
You may be right that you are seeing the proofs but so far you haven't showed them to me. Now thats really deplorable. It smells of, you guessed it right, lie and fabrication.

//what makes me laugh more, i witnessed, read open and heard myself, but u all thought i never did.//
More of your rhetoric yarns.

//When u ask proof, i give hints how to and where. But u refuse to see, refuse to go, and refuse to open urself.//
You pointed to Al Umdah in one case, it is a Fiqh. You said it contains reference to authentic sources that provide the genealogy. You lied and on being probed further started discussing this and that :-). Tells a lot about your ability and honesty.

//u claimed primary authentic proof from comment box. //
I even told you what will count as authentic. I challenged you and you failed.

//I did tell ask me anything, questions as many as u want. Insha Allah ill answer.//
It is evident that you can't even provide a proof to any of your claim.

// I even asked, any question to my sheikh, directly as the closer source, u still didnt have tendency.//
And even you shiekh didn't provide you the proofs to those outlandish claims.

//Im suspicious that u keep asking questions after question so that the focus goes to ur questions, not to tabayyun urs and infidels claims.//
Don't lie. In this thread I haven't asked you any questions yet. I have asked you to provide evidence, logic or reason for your claims.

//If i keep answering, when will u answer mine?//
Very simple. The person who makes the claims first has to provide the evidence to the satisfaction of the audience. Off course these proofs will be critically judged. Once that is done counter claims can be examined and rejected or accepted. I have never denied you the right to ask questions but that can't be preemptive or punitive.

I did tell ask me anything, questions as many as u want. Insha Allah ill answer. I even asked, any question to my sheikh, directly as the closer source, u still didnt have tendency. Im suspicious that u keep asking questions after question so that the focus goes to ur questions, not to tabayyun urs and infidels claims. If i keep answering, when will u answer mine? Its nizams pattern im well aware. the taqiyah tabayyun topic must in balance from both sides.

Its funny that u never heard of new york hall of science and never visited it. Why dont u go there and see with ur eyes the inventions from A to Z. I only laughed when u kept asking for that while u never showed tendency to tabayyun infidels statement and no tabayyun from ur own statements. Its really funny that i my self know and see the proofs myself and u still say wheres the proof, u wanna see, but u dont wanna open or visit urself. but u never asked other claims from infidels, isnt it fishy? I myself keep laughing cos even before i read these articles i already saw the primary authentic proofs. what makes me laugh more, i witnessed, read open and heard myself, but u all thought i never did. that makes me believe in my god more, cos god and me see the truth in real life. While u keep saying its taqiyah or lies. When u ask proof, i give hints how to and where. But u refuse to see, refuse to go, and refuse to open urself. u claimed primary authentic proof from comment box. That makes me laugh more. For example, just saying im sad/mad cant represent the emotion. the real emotion is felt in heart, not in words.

@narcole1919721,
//Its obvious articles here are mixed with lies.//
Possibly yes. Nobody stops you from refuting them with logic or evidence.

//You swallowed all.//
How do you know? You have no idea what I swallow and what I not.

//You keep saying foolish, foolish, but are you aware its muslims who laugh at you by seeing how foolish ur efforts attacking islam with lies? //
Thats why you are foolish. I call you foolish only when you make foolish argument or conclusion and I state there why I think that is foolish. For example this one is a foolish statement because these exclamations are nothing but rhetoric without actually pushing the discussion forward. You or other muslims haven't been able to refute allegations from me (I am not talking about Sina).

//Why, cos u think lying is permissible in destroying something u dislike?//
No. In fact I think it is wrong to hide the truth. In most so called secular countries I see this protectionism where the evils of Islam are subsided. For example this utter lie that you spoke that the infidels learned their science from Muslim discoverer. An abject lie for which you couldn't even come up with a list of such discoveries.

//Even you infidels support other infidels to use taquiya//
You digress. My objection is about specific claims that are raised without any evidence forthcoming. In the absence of evidence such outlandish claims are nothing but lies and must be exposed.

//Dont you have any more honorable way to attack us? Desperate? //
One look at this post and people will know who is desperate:-). I think an attack can't be more reasonable and honourable.
1. You make claim, I ask for proof.
2. You provide a proof, I probe it further.
3. You don't then either you leave the debate or accept that you are wrong.
4. You use diversions or other fallacious techniques I try to hold you back onto the point of discussion and call your bluff.

This is the most valid and civil method of argumentation. Note that despite having posted almost 100 comments you haven't come with a single source or evidence to your claims.

For example, victims in philipine. if you do care about humanity, why dont you help them with all ur effort as best as you can? Did you donate some of ur money, did you ask people around you to give their hands? Did you cry when u saw the victims starving with no food, water nor medicine? Did you curse people who are careless to have empathy instead of cursing god and ur not doing anything? Did you pray to ur nameless god to help them? why dont u go there instead and give them help and say its help from ur god through ur hands instead of cursing people u never met? Where the humanity u used to boast? Where the proof of ur love toward humans? They are clearly in desperation, abandoned by their own government. Wheres the real proof from ur words? No action, talk only.

Objective what? Its obvious articles here are mixed with lies. Did you ever tabayyun? You swallowed all. are you unable to point out islams error without lies? You keep saying foolish, foolish, but are you aware its muslims who laugh at you by seeing how foolish ur efforts attacking islam with lies? Why, cos u think lying is permissible in destroying something u dislike? Are you aware its you all that use taquiya (lies) to attack islam, not 'muslims' who use taquiya (lies) to defend islam. Even you infidels support other infidels to use taquiya, and no tabayyun effort. At least i did find some atheists who could notice this and dislike ur dirty method. Dont you have any more honorable way to attack us? Desperate?

I do not attack Christianity and Judaism. Ali Sina has in my opinion made a false statement regarding the beliefs and Jews and Christians (in an effort to sharpen the differences between Islam and other religions) and I have tried to demonstrate this by providing evidence. I hope you will be able to look at the evidence objectively and compare with the statements made by Ali Sina.

In another article on incest, I wonder why the same logic does not apply to Jews and Christians.

That you believe Islam is an error is fine by me. But if you were to tell me that Muslims are evil or immoral because of some practice yet you do not reach the same conclusion about other regions who share the same practice, then that is hypocrisy.

That is unfortunately the case with the two articles I have read so far on this site.

@narcole1919721
I am always trying to be objective. In this thread it is you who made certain claims, as elsewhere, so the burden of proof lies on you. If you follow my posts you will find I do pose agianst @zitouni, @amin and others. But why should we even discuss that here?

Taqiya is simply: use of lies, half truths, distorted truths, as necessary in order to help Islam survive and to help Islamize the world. Even discussions about Islamic sources itself, can be distorted as necessary, and whether deliberately or unwittingly, in order to help Islam survive and conquer the world. The use of lies, excuses, BS, etc, are all Halal to a muslim, if done to protect Islam.

That's it. So, what is it you're trying to do?
If this is just a trick question in order to divert from discussions that dissect Islam, then yes, this is a form of taqqiya.

This is also why I'm fascinated by fiction works about Zombie Apocalypse. Islam being the zombie virus, the muslims as angry hungry and braindead as zombies, and they multiply like crazy.
Of course they don't want to make the world a better place, because to them literally life is short, they pursue death, glorify and revel in it, all in the name of their zombie prophet and zombie god.
And their purpose is only one: to islamize eg zombiefy the world and the universe.
But this virus is elusive. Many people who has the infection live in denial, saying 'we are just fine'. But the possibility is there: that they could suddenly regress and turn into a zombie menace, often without even them realizing it.
Individually the zombie's weak.
They have 2 methods of attack however: when they are in majority they swarm, they mob attack aggressively. When they're the minority? They try to appear benign and harmless, try to look like regular illness, meanwhile continue spreading their virus and multiply their numbers.

This is why sites like this offer hope, Dr. Ali Sina 's work can help vaccinate you from this zombie virus.
So the ones not infected yet will be safer. The ones who already are infected? Well they can be cured too, if they want to be cured that is. Sadly some people could already be so damaged that healing can take a long time. Even sadder still, many people simply refuse to see that this threat is real.

My bf can be a kitten and can be a toad anytime. But i already accepted and tolerate his toadness. hes a toad when he sees moonlight. Just be patient and wait, he'll become nice again later. Prophet taught if mad, may silent, but not more than 3 days. Its very effective to us 🙂

Hey you completely ignored all my accusations of islam! I guess you've run out of real arguments huh? You don't need to give me your life story; I can tell you that after marriage, your bf won't be the same dude you thought he was. Before marriage, muslim men just lure you right in. If they showed you their true nature before marriage, would you marry them? I doubt it! But once you do, you're essentially stuck with him. You are so naive I feel bad for you. Trust is important, but naivety invites disaster. As for the Haggar story, if you really wanted a kid, just adopt an orphan goddammit! A much better deed if you ask me. You don't need to encourage lecherous muslim men from seeking multiple sex partners for that! Stop digging your own grave!

I have many goals of life, but i dont want those make me abandon husband kids and house. My bf believes im a superwoman who could do all tasks perfectly, but i already told that im a person who does things one by one with focus, cant do many things perfectly at the same time. And i want perfection in each. So to me poligamy would be a nice way to help. but my bf still believes i can do all perfectly. which is low frm that 🙂

Help from your hubby's other wives? Get real! Careful they don't make him divorce you. Jealous of you? Leave that to your future co-wives, or yourself for that matter. It's fine and dandy that your future hubby promises he won't hit you (wink wink) but he does have the right according to islam. How does that make you feel? You've already accepted that you're a lesser human because you think men should be able to have multiple wives, but women can't have multiple husbands (both of which are problematic). You are admitting that you are inferior to men. Go figure. You maniacal; you actually WANT your husband to seek other wives, which further lowers your already LOW status as a muslim woman! Could you get any lower? I hope not! 🙂

Hm i already told this that i dont mind poligamy. i even pushed him to do so cos i might need help later. But hes always pissed if i talk about that. One is too much for him ;p and he already emphasized that he cant forgive himself if he lays hands on me or his mother. Dont be jealous, okay 🙂

Hey listen up. I don't support any kind of evil in this world but you do. Instead of asking me to "look at myself" why don't you just admit that you've been following a devil's vision of how humans should act? Why can't you come up with a justification, you keep beating around the bushes everytime I REMIND you what muhammad did to Aisha? You know as well as I do that it was despicable. Stop denying the truth. If you don't, then back up what you believe in (you can't I promise you). Islam is so utterly flawed that no one can back it up unless they are lying or are just plain stupid.

I think you show here the Jewish Origines of Islam. If we make the exception for the religion of the Aton of Echnaton in Egypt, roughly around 1300 BC, the Jews were the first monotheistic people.

They used the alfabet to write their holy scripture, which before the alfabet existed could not be done. After they were defeated by Nebuchadnezzar in 586 BC, and exiled, in part, to Babylon, they started to write theTorah.

In the 5th century there were still only # 150.000 of them (according to Norman Cantor), by then many back in Israel. They almost certainly proselytized, and expanded in numbers that way, because it is estimated that in the time of Jesus, in the Roman empire, there were # 6 million of them, 2/3 outside of Israel (perhaps many defeated Carthaginians joined Judaism?).

In the 2nd century BC the Maccabees or Hasmoneans made the kingdom of Israel independent for 1 century, until Pompejus of the Romans conquered it, and many infidels were forcibly converted in that century. In the Hasmonean time Judaism was still further developed, for instance with the concept of an afterlife for all individuals (heaven or hell).

In Roman times there was the off-shoot of Christianity and in the 7th century Islam came into being, also in big part dependent on Judaism.

How short is the time that monotheism exists! Dependent as it was on the Jewish people, who "started" it (IMO) and on the invention of the alfabet and also on wars and the Roman Empire (according to Andrew Marr's history of the world).

Imagine; Mankind may exist # 200.000 years, # 10.000 years ago agriculture began, before that people lived in groups of max. 150 persons. # 3500 bc the first cities came, before that people lived in small groups, villages only. # 2400 there was the first empire/ state (of Sargon of Akkad, with the exception of already united Egypt).

But only from the 6th century bc until now there was monotheism, dependent on holy scripture. And I suppose it served good purposes.

Oh and if he's a muslim have fun when he starts whooping you and brings home up to 3 more wives who will drive you crazier than you already are. And should you seek divorce, god forbid, good luck obtaining it as I believe it is no simple matter for women (men can say "talak talak talak" and the deed is done). See how sexist islam is? You are succumbing to its evils and so you are a shame to all women. Use your head!

@narcole1919721
//Really? You know who else, right?//
Not always, but sometimes, yes. Anybody making a claim could be challenged to give authentic resource and evidence. If others aren't asking or not asked doesn't mean that you earn the right to make arbitrary claims.

@narcole1919721
//Is it only me whos with 'claims'?//
Its you who made claims on this particular thread from where I started pitching in. So, yes, in the current context you made claims and you also claimed to provide the proofs. Not a single came our way though.

@narcole1919721
//If you wanna buy from me, you need to pay//
Tch tch. Foolish girl, its not about me paying for your services, but you cleaning after you have dumped garbage.

//Or if its credit card, you need to show that u have the ability to pay the debt//
As I said, it is you who made some claims, the debt is on you and YOU have to prove that you have the ability to pay it off

Today is ashura! Ashura is a day of great historical significance. On this day: Allah (Subhanahu wa Ta'ala) accepted the repentance of Sayyidina Adam ('Alaihis-Salaam) after his exile from Paradise; Allah (Subhanahu wa Ta'ala) saved Sayyidina Nuh ('Alaihis-Salaam) and his companions in the ark; Allah extinguished the fire in which Sayyidina Ibrahim ('Alaihis-Salaam) was thrown by Nimrod; And Allah (Subhanahu wa Ta'ala) spoke directly to Sayyidina Musa ('Alaihis-Salaam) and gave him the Commandments. On this same 10th of Muharram, Sayyidina Ayyub ('Alaihis-Salaam) was restored to health (from leprosy); Sayyidina Yusuf ('Alaihis-Salaam) was reunited with his father Ya’qub ('Alaihis-Salaam); Sayyidina Yunus ('Alaihis-Salaam) was taken out from the belly of the fish; and the sea was divided as the nation of israel was delivered from captivity and Pharoah’s army was destroyed. ‘Ashura is also the day when Sayyidina Dawud ('Alaihis-Salaam) was forgiven; the kingdom of Sulaiman ('Alaihis-Salaam) was restored; Sayyidina Isa ('Alaihis-Salaam) was raised to Jannah and Sayyidina al-Husayn (Radiyallahu 'anh) (the Holy Prophet’s, Sallallahu ‘alayhi wa Sallam, grandson) achieved the honor of Martyrdom.

Were you crying tears of joy that you follow a pedophile "prophet"? You didn't cry when you first heard that muhammad married a child? Because I did. I get that not everyone has morality, but muslims clearly lack it.

A person isnt muslim by name. A person is muslim from tajwid and tauhid. Tajwid from mouth, and tauhid from heart. as you know 5 pillars of islam represent tajwid, and 6 pillars of iman represent tauhid. you infidels label someone a muslim as you like, without knowing what a muslim is.

It's so sad really. How muslims turn a blind eye to the pedophilia of that monster muhammad. Narcole is an example of those sickos. That was the only proof I needed to reject islam; if muhammad could bring himself to marry a little girl, IMAGINE what BS he has been spewing all along! Narcole started dodging the issue which ultimately means she has no justification for the perverted "prophet" she so reveres. Muslims are so shameless!

Confusing? To who? If there are two women fighting over a baby, each claims that its her baby, its her who gave birth the baby…who will be confused? watchers ofcourse. But the real mother of course knows whos the real mother and whos the fake one. but a wise judge will test the women to see whos the real mother and whos not. The judge will test them by saying, alright, if u both love the baby so much, split the baby into two. Each may have half. Of course real mother would disagree and choose to give the baby to fake mother instead of splitting it. now what are you, a watcher?

Because going for truth and against loyalty to religion, family and community, may be very painful for two generations, but in the long run future generations will not be bothered by disloyalties of people in the past but they can be bothered by untrue, obsolete dogma's and they can benefit from more true, accurate, effective dogma's or values or lifestyles than those their ancestors were disloyal to.

And being born into Islam is a bit like being born into a country and having the right to be a citizen of that country all one's life, while it is for most people difficult to change nationality. But changing nationality is still easier than changing religion when born in Islam.

But for being a citizen of a country there is no official doctrine in the truth of which a citizen MUST believe, but in Islam a member is obliged to believe in the truth of it's doctrine, often without any or much serious examination of it, from cradle to grave.

Potentially much better contradicting, competing theories to Islam's dogma's may never replace and trump them for born and converted Muslims (who, once changed, may then no longer change significantly).

So seemingly there is something that is more important than truth for Muslims; being inside and loyal to Islam, even when the two seem to contradict each other. But in such a case, after much deep consideration, I would go for the truth, NOT the loyalty.

Moreover, in my democratic world, people can voluntarily join and leave organisations, parties, but they do so with the understanding that they either adhere to the guidelines of the party

or, when they deviate from those guidelines, in a significant way, they can be thrown out of the parties or organisations, after initial warnings.

But in Islam one is born, and is expected to stay in all his/ her life. Deviation of guidelines is not followed by expulsion. And that means that members of Islam in large numbers cannot be trusted to follow Islam's guidelines in a meaningful way, because deviants are not removed, so are still among them.

I suppose Ahmadiyya's are the exception. Ahmadiyya's consider themselves Muslims, but many Muslims say that Ahmadiyya's are NOT MUSLIMS. We also sometimes hear Sunni Muslims say that Shiite Muslims are not real Muslims. But all adhere to the 5 pillars of Islam. Confusing.

Interesting that Quran-Hadiths-Sira are absolutely unchangeable and not to be augmented under Islamic law. But that among Muslims there is so much variation and dispute in interpretation about those finite texts.

But what does that tell us? How can Muslims be sure that what they interpret is indeed what Allah, through Mohammed, wanted to convey to mankind? And for which time?

In contrast, in my world the most important legal guiding texts can democratically be changed, parts can be removed and replaced and augmented to improve clarity and effectivity.

That means that when guiding texts are interpreted and practiced in many different ways, democratic people can fine-tune texts so that all who adhere to them understand them the same way all the way.

But Muslims have no such solution because THEIR most importang guiding texts must remain totally unchanged. With no end in sight, except for judgement day. Now, God may be wiser than mankind, but mankind adapts with the times while God doesn't, it seems to me.

Narcole, What is it that you hope for mankind as a whole in 21st century, if judgement day will not come? For society? So apart from your personal life.

No doubt that a big part or all of mankind becomes like you? But do you hope that people be, stay and become Muslims in your way only or Muslims in general, but many of them different from your way? In other words; do you appreciate people being Muslims regardless which interpretation of Islam they have, or don't you make any distinction between people being Muslim-but-different-from-your-sect's-interpretation and people being infidel? Because only YOUR sect is right and will go to heaven?

Interesting, Narcole. OK, so you have spiritual guidance from "Sheikhs". And you have the spiritual goal of living in a specific Islamic way. I hope you live to be a 100 years old. I hope your spiritual goals will evolve in a good way in your long life.

@i am a communist
//chuck baby. test has called correctly krishna the lecher as a better one at taqqiya. why dont you answer that first?? //
Son, I know what @Test has said. He has just made a statement without any followup example or evidence. His statement is: "The best example of taqiyah was done by Lord Krishna. Any Hindu's comments are welcome". He talks about some example(s) which he hasn't quoted. I can give my 'answers' as you say, but where are the questions that @Test has posed? @Test simply wanted to ignite some Hindu passion and have a good laugh. Obviously he failed, because nobody fell for the trap. Now you want to ignite the same spark again. Best of luck.

i belong to no religion. i have no god. unlike others i am a free man having only love for my fellow human beings. that includes you, chuck, ali and countless others on this site and elsewhere. i hate only the dogmas and theories which restrict one from being natural, from being a human being. that includes your mohammadianism, hinduism and other religious craps. sorry for my comment on your boy friend. that was said in a lighter vein, a joke. if that hurts you i am really sorry. may you live your love forever and your love for each other swell every day.

chuck baby. test has called correctly krishna the lecher as a better one at taqqiya. why dont you answer that first??

I just moved cos my sheikh suggested me so. I lived with relatives with different sect with mine, but same kitab and hadiths. We kept argueing since there huge differences between us. But when being asked, wheres the proof, the authentic source? They mentioned same sources but different teaching. Then i consulted with sheikh and his guys, and some of his guys went here for some mission, spying dhal sects and catch them to stop them spreading chaos and misunderstandings. 92 ulama gathered to discuss that there are 49 new dhal sections just entered this place already. one of sheikhs guy was ordered to catch an infidel priest disguising as a moslem scholar with moslems name whos task to brainwash college students, especially poor ones. Sheikh strongly suggested me to move, cos if someone painting a wall and if i stand near him/her, i might get splashed by the paint. i asked how come same kitabs but different teachings? sheikh warned me to be careful of translated kitabs from certain persons from certain places. same kitabs but different translators. well, islam and sunnah nabi will always stay the same and will never change. Its just the people who interprete as they like who change it.

*coughs* few days ago when moving i just heard news..which i had already heard before but hadnt known that it would happen to people i know…my neighbors son just converted to christianity and now got paid about $3500-$5000 every month, to persuade muslims to leave islam for getting money like him too…and i also heard my ex driver also left islam and persuading moslems to leave islam with money at least $3500 per month too…now…its time to detect ur apostasy, mr sina. How much?

Phew…just moved for hijrah..sheikh gave a long amazing lecture and made us teary…*sobs* hm..where were we? Ahh..until when u want on defense mode? Its like debit card and credit card. I have debit card. You have credit card. I buy, you sell. You buy, i sell. But in the end, the one with credit card needs to pay again.

It starts with the following:
"r8.0 LYING
r8.1 (Nawawi:) Primary texts from the Koran and sunna that it is unlawful to lie (dis:p24) are both
numerous and intersubstantiative, it being among the ugliest sins and most disgusting faults. Because of
the scholarly consensus of the Community (Umma) that it is prohibited and the unanimity and amount of
the primary textual evidence, there is little need to cite particular examples thereof, out only concern
here being to explain the exceptions to what is considered lying, and apprise of the details.
PERMISSIBLE LYING
r8.2 The Prophet (Allah bless him and give him peace) said,
“He who settles disagreements between people to bring about good or says something commendable
is not a liar.''
This much is related by both Bukhari and Muslim, with Muslim's version recording that Umm Kulthum
added,
“I did not hear him permit untruth in anything people say, except for three things: war, settling
disagreements and a man talking with his wife or she with him (A:in smoothing over differences),''

Then when discussing Ghazali, the author states:

"If something is attainable through both telling the truth and lying, it is unlawful to accomplish it
through lying because there is no need for it. When it is possible to achieve such an aim by lying but not by
telling the truth, it is permissible to lie if attaining the goal is permissible (N:i.e. when the purpose of lying
is to circumvent someone who is preventing one from doing something permissible), and obligatory to lie if the goal is obligatory. When for example one is concealing a muslim from an oppressor who asks where he is, it is obligatory to lie about his being hidden. Or when a person deposits an article with one for
safekeeping and an oppressor wanting to appropriate it inquires about it, it is obligatory to lie about having
concealed it, for if one informs him about the article and he then siezes it, one is financially liable(A:to
the owner)to cover the article's cost."

Some points.

1. Nowhere in the section on lying are "infidels" mentioned. I would think if lying to the infidels were ordered in Islam then it would be made rather clear in the reliance of the traveler (which I assume you think is not a book written to deceive the infidels).

2. Nothing about hiding the true nature of Islam (from infidels); for example the rest of the book is quite forthright about jihad and other controversial subjects.

3. The words Taqqiya (or kitman) do not appear at all. Maybe the spelling is different?

4. Elsewhere in the book, there are numerous section quoting Quran and Hadiths condemning liars.

5. I think the lying you are concerned about is which concerns war but this is basically good advice from a general to his troops. If you are at war, you are allowed to deceive the enemy. For example by hiding your position or sending false information. This is standard in warfare and explained quite well by Clausewitz. It would be strange for the prophet to tell Muslims that they are not allowed to lie to the enemy during war for example. In fact, it would be suicidal for any General to do so.

My opinion. I think it makes sense to allow lying in some cases (it makes no sense to eschew it completely such as Kant argued). Lying for a good cause makes sense for example (the example that no one will argue with is the lying-to-the-nazis-to-protect-jewish-children). I think it also makes sense to be allowed to hide your religion is someone will kill you or harm you for it (once again the jewish example and the controversy among jews as to whether this is permissible; also the shiite practice of taqqiya when living among a sunny majority). To me (and I think to you at some level); this is basic common sense. A religion which claims to be a complete way of life aught to be able to comment on this aspect of human and natural life.

On a side note, the book mentions that lying about the prophet is unbelief. Do you think that a Muslim using taqqiya who would claim that the prophet was a pacifist or that he never allowed deceiving the infidels would thus paradoxically be committing kufr?

@mp11
I dont want you to solve anything. The burden of proof isn't on me, I don't make the claim that taqqiya exists. In fact, I think its complete nonsense invented by key figures in the anti-muslim movement.//

We 've presented a passage from the hadith that lies ( a form of taqiya) are acceptable in Islam,thus fulfilling our burden of proof.You have the burden of rebuttal to tell us why its inadmissible and have failed to do so by shifting the blame to "anti-muslim movements",without presenting any evidence for this claim.

This of course could be me playing taqqiyah since Muslims are ordered to lie about the true nature of their religion.//
Like I said before,this dilemma of "you could be playing taqiyah or not" is your problem.We use the principles of logic and rational thought to weed out lies,inconsistencies,incoherencies and irrationalities.

So you see that taqqiya makes any meaningful discussion impossible by poisoning the well and we are condemned to go around in circle. //
This paradox that you find yourself in is just one of Muhammad's gifts to his followers.

Dear Mr. Sina, I appreciate your consistency in answering. I hope that you see what happens when we take your ideas to their logical conclusions. Putting that aside, I was interested in your quoting Ghazali. Can you point me to the exact source?

I dont want you to solve anything. The burden of proof isn't on me, I don't make the claim that taqqiya exists. In fact, I think its complete nonsense invented by key figures in the anti-muslim movement. This of course could be me playing taqqiyah since Muslims are ordered to lie about the true nature of their religion. So you see that taqqiya makes any meaningful discussion impossible by poisoning the well and we are condemned to go around in circle.

The act itself is not a lie,it would require an additional false statement to accompany it but a lie does not need an act.

//So it appears we have a contradiction, you say that Ali is right and that all lies are permissible (lies being only statements) but then a Muslim would not be able to say certain things in deception.//

Muhammad have placed muslims in a conundrum by commanding them to lie and now you want me to solve it for you.Muslims do not value honesty and you wonder why we don't trust you. You muslims murder apostates,how do you not know they were lying to advance Islam,after all this problem is yours,we're just the reporters,exposing what you try to conceal.

you have been fighting with a vain woman for more than a week. bro. get out of it. it is not worth it. as i said before ' Never wrestle with a pig: you will find later that You both get all dirty, and the pig is really liking it".

dear nicole.
it is good to see that you still have your humor on. your submission to a narcissistic cult had nt wrestled it away. but you talk and talk and talk dear. how your boyfriend is tolerating you? (BTW have you seen the movie how to lose a guy in 10 days?)

There is a hadith that makes this practice legal according to the Sharia

Bukhari :: Book 5 :: Volume 58 :: Hadith 124
Narrated Sa’d’s father:

When the emigrants reached Medina. Allah’s Apostle established the bond of fraternity between ‘Abdur-Rahman and Sad bin Ar-Rabi. Sad said to ‘Abdur-Rahman, “I am the richest of all the Ansar, so I want to divide my property (between us), and I have two wives, so see which of the two you like and tell me, so that I may divorce her, and when she finishes her prescribed period (i.e. ‘Idda) of divorce, then marry her.” Abdur-Rahman said, “May Allah bless your family and property for you; where is your market?” So they showed him the Qainuqa’ market. (He went there and) returned with a profit in the form of dried yogurt and butter. He continued going (to the market) till one day he came, bearing the traces of yellow scent. The Prophet asked, “What is this (scent)?” He replied, “I got married.” The Prophet asked, “How much Mahr did you give her?” He replied, “I gave her a date-stone of gold or a gold piece equal to the weight of a date-stone.” (The narrator, Ibrahim, is in doubt as to which is correct.)

As for whether Muslims do it now,. yes of course they do it. Just search sex jihad. On youtube you can find many testimonies of women being asked by their husband or father to temporarily marry a man to have sex with. Some of them say they “married” several men in one night.
This is one report http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zAWFHdHIPxk

just a thought. is it true that mo ordered his followers to divorce their wives and distribute them for free to those who were not able to get married? why aren't the zombies doing such things now? are they not following their cult leader to the paper? (or are they doing it stealthily nowadays?)

The gain may be the victory of Islam in 1000 years or tomorrow. So what would stop a taqqiya muslim fake apostate from even risking his life (for example murder by another Muslim who is not in on the plot) if it advances Islam? As you rightfully say there is no limit. Maybe the strategy is to infiltrate the anti-Muslim movement or to be virulently anti-Islamic and then "see the light" and come back to Islam (a great propaganda coup) or a myriad other things.

If all Muslims lie then we have to assume that all Muslims lie. Given the existential threat that Islam poses, why should we take a chance to trust any ex-Muslim (since Muslims are ordered to lie to infidels and all lies are permissible)?

You have to ask what they gain by deceiving you. Some people, for example, accuse Mossab Hassan to be lying. What is his gain? You can't be suspicious of every apostate. The ones who lie have an agenda and very soon they try to promote it.. It is really not that difficult to detect who is sincere and who is not. We all have intuition. It is generally accurate. This is not an exact science. But anyone with commonsense can tell the difference between one who is genius and one who is fake. The point is not to doubt every apostate, who have often risked their lives by leaving Islam, but to be careful of the frauds that Muslims play. Those who lie always want something from you, maybe they want information, or maybe concession or maybe something else.

But how do you know you can detect all the liars? and how would you teach others to do this? Maybe there are real good liars out there and you would never know? how would non-muslim societies be able to design a filter system to find out who among the apostates (not the moderates since we have to assume they are all lying, knowingly or unknowingly) is to be trusted. We are dealing with the greatest existential threat the free world has ever known and you cannot be everywhere at once weeding out the liars.

A Muslim generally does not make derogatory statements publicly, unless he has to. However, he will like to you in private to deceive you. A Muslims does not see this as a lie. It comes natural to him. Even new Muslims lie. Defending Islam and advancing it become so important that they thing everything else including truthfulness are dispensable. a Muslim may be so honest that he may not lie to defend his or her own life they they will lie to defend Islam. The bran new Muslims starts lying from day one, and they don't realize they are lying. Deceiving others to advance Islam is part of being Muslims. Every Muslim who has posted comments in this site has lied and they knew they were lying, but were convinced that Islam must be defended, so they don't see themselves as liars.

You have to use your commonsense and intuition, I generally can detect disingenuous apostates from their first email. The reason they lies is because they have agenda and you can often smell something is fishy. I also receive countless emails from people who leave Islam and I know they are not lying. Trust your intuition and read between the lines. The deceivers have hidden agenda and they soon reveal it.

Thanks Mr. Sina, so that brings me back to the logical question. How can any ex-Muslim be trusted since Taqqiya allows one to lie in every possible way to advance Islam. What better to fool infidels and lull them into a false sense of security then pretend to be an ex-muslim? one could even overcompensate in order to appear more genuine.

But then a Muslim would presumably be able to " declare publicly that Muhammad was a psychopath,pedophile,rapist and a complete idiot." since that would be a statement and all lies being permissible? But then you're saying that a Muslim would not be able to do that; only an apostate would:
As you say, thats " one method of detecting a muslim's sincere apostasy.". So it appears we have a contradiction, you say that Ali is right and that all lies are permissible (lies being only statements) but then a Muslim would not be able to say certain things in deception.

@Demsci
Thanks for your comments Demsci. Its been some times since you last commented. Better cards or not, if I am wrong in my position it should be easy to beat me (And by 'me' I mean any person). @Narcole, for reasons best known to her, acts as a slippery customer. I find her not to respect the concept of burden of proof (which lies squarely on the claimant) but tries to shift the burden to the opposition. This is not uncommon, but a poor method. This method works on the premise that any alternate claim, that might crop up down the line by the opposition can be made the central issue and attacked or tire the opposition down a long winding chain of comments unrelated to the subject and then claim 'victory' since the the opposition simply feels disinterested to continue. Obscurantism. Having had the opportunity to actually work with some Communist academicians I am only too well aware of this process.

You are also correct that I am working with an adaptive framework of reasoning. If the claim is tenable with logic and a valid probative proof then I am prepared to change my opinion on that particular point. As simple as that and this has happened in the past

@narcole1919721
//Aww daddy chuck…dont tell me u got amnesia for challenges and questions before//
I don't mind repeating your claims, do I? So you can repeat them here if you want to AFTER we have discussed through your claims and proofs.

//any message or question to him? //
Why? He didn't make any claim here that I would like to refute.

//Lol anyway, how many times i asked whats the definition of proof?//
And how many times have I told you what I would consider a valid proof to your claims in the context of this discussion? Or are you asking for a literal meaning of the word 'proof'? If so, I think you can consult any dictionary or thesarus. I am well aware of the fallacy you want me to be in. A proof will have probative weight.

Aww daddy chuck…dont tell me u got amnesia for challenges and questions before..is it cos of age or what? 🙁 oh btw good news, my sheikh just arrived. He came from far place to visit me. ^^ any message or question to him?

@narcole1919721
//Yeah, yeah, no problemo papa. but pwease tell me will u do my challenges and answer my questions, yes or not.//
Poor child. The proofs are still awaited.

I also told you to iterate my claims that you want to challenge or the subjects that you want to question me about. Once you do that only then I can commit :-). You seem to have some sort of problem in understanding this very basic premise for a debate or discussion.

@narcole1919721
//You still havent given definition of proof yet//
You forgot I already defined what I would consider a primary source. You have to show an authentic primary source dating back to Muhammad's time. This could be a Shahi Hadith, or something mentioned in the Sira or even Quran giving the genealogy from Abraham. This wouldn't or shouldn't be, for example, some 10th century opinion or a daif/hasan hadith. For the claim that there are scientific discoveries which infidels learned from Muslim discoverers, who picked it from Islamic Theological studies, you only need to furnish a list of such discoveries, say 10 such prominent discoveries. All you need to say is name of the discovery, Muslim discoverer, Quranic verse on which it is based.

//its not really about whos first.//
It is about who makes a claim and what is the subject of discussion.

//But who has tendency to do the challenges and answer the questions. well, you can see i dont have tendency to runaway//
Your tendency, as evident so far, is to digress from the claims that you yourself make. There is good sized list and it is growing for some time now.

//Now, are you up to that? //
Depends. What you mean by 'that'? I question your claims. You haven't even said what you want to ask me questions about or challenge me about? I have no knowledge of a vast number of subjects, cursory knowledge of some, passing knowledge about a few, strong understanding of very few and expert level at even fewer.

As I see it, the fact that one or possibly two generations of Muslims will suffer, because Islam is exchanged for IMo better religions/ lifestyles, and they will be heartbroken because their children break with it,

is less important than all subsequent human generations choosing the best of religions/ lifestyles under equal chances, in honest competition. And then having no more allegiance/ loyalty to Islam. But only to the well-being of their parents and community and mankind as a whole , while being left free and leaving their children free to choose religion/ lifestyle of lack thereof.

And I prefer future generations to be more democratic and scientifically oriented than many Muslims worldwide now are, I prefer them to be more like many infidels are now. I think about the longer term-consequences for mankind.

Because Narcole may have the perspective that
A. HER OWN LIFE is too deeply committed to Islam and the reward of heaven to ever change religion, because
B. she cannot possibly perceive of a better alternative to Islam as guideline for individuals and society as a whole.

But we humans should also consider what it is what we want future generations to believe, use as guidelines and inspiration, if they seek this. In case judgement day does NOT come.

We can consider that newborn babies have sorts of blank slates and need not invest their life so heavily in Islam, like Narcole already did, but instead should choose from a variety of religions/ lifestyles, while being informed in equal measure of all the most important ones.

And of course, someone like Chuck has the intention of following evidence to WHEREVER it leads him. But Narcole already committed herself to an established religion/ lifestyle which dictates hardly changeable dogma's and standpoints to her, which she has to defend at all costs and against all the odds. In a time when debaters have all the freedom, time and information to discuss all aspects of Islam being true or false, coming from God or from mankind, beneficial or detrimental to society and most important for me, to future generations in the 21st century.

The good thing about Narcole is that she never seems to give up. But Chuck is right about having the better cards, I think. Because IMO defending Islam as the truth against all evidence to the contrary gives a person bad cards and her opponent better cards. Because defending Islam as being true and from God is, well, very hard, especially when the Muslim doing it is bound to defend all of the Quran, which according to Islam contains no errors.

And defending Islam is greatly hampered and negated by how other Muslims, in plain view, interpret and practice it, saying and doing all these reprehensible and even violent things.

At best this shows Islam to be very ambiguous, multi-interpretational and therefore either useless or in big need of upgrading. But upgrading Islam is forbidden by Islam and influential Islamic clerics and school of thought! Because not one iota of holy texts, prescribing behavior for Muslims and organisation of society may be changed, not even after 1400 years!

While Chuck adheres to a system that is much more flexible, and prepared to adapt to changing times and thus improve, thus dumping obsolete laws and adding new useful laws. And thus seek better, more precise, clear, wording of the laws and guidelines.

The Muslims, in contrast, are confined to ONLY RE-INTERPRET unchangeable texts and laws. And until when? Until some unknown day of judgement. But what if that does not come for another 100 years?

If the positions were reversed, Chuck being Muslim, and Narcole being against Islam, Narcole could easily beat Chuck in discussions. But now Chuck has the upper hand all the time IMO. Because he indeed does hold the better cards.

I don't think there is any limit set when it comes to deceiving. In the hadith of Ka'b ibn Ashraf, Muhammad gives total freedom to Muhammad ibn Maslama and his friends to say whatever is needed to deceive Ka'b. No limit is set. You can burn the Quran, you can swear by God, you can insult Muhammad and say anything is needed, as long as your heart is strong, your tongue can be as loose as required,. It is the intent that matters not what you say or do. Your intent must be to deceive the non-believers and take advantage of their trust. Once you can prove how you managed to stab them in the back, no Muslim can blame you for lying, for burning the Quran or pissing on it.

You still havent given definition of proof yet 🙂 And dont worry about me, time will tell in the end. its not really about whos first. But who has tendency to do the challenges and answer the questions. well, you can see i dont have tendency to runaway, im only postponing until im sure you will do the same. Now, are you up to that?

@narcole1919721
//Hehe..as i said before i have no problem with that//
Still no proof coming though.

//already saved the aces and waiting for right moment to open//
Go ahead.

//im just making sure whether u got better cards or not.//
Being an infidel is the greatest ace one can have.

//Well gotta open some card, actually i already knew ur next cards for speed of light before u even asked//
You are plain lying. You are so full of yourself that you don't even know what you are talking about.

//But like usual, u ranaway from my questions or challenge with excuse refusing to answer mine by saying either the thing not related to ur first question or throw it with closed eyes//
Lady's first.

Well gotta open some card, actually i already knew ur next cards for speed of light before u even asked, and already asked u questions that will lead u to answer ur next questions before u even ask. But like usual, u ranaway from my questions or challenge with excuse refusing to answer mine by saying either the thing not related to ur first question or throw it with closed eyes 😉

Hehe..as i said before i have no problem with that, already saved the aces and waiting for right moment to open. im just making sure whether u got better cards or not. anyway..i wonder..is poker face taqiya to you too? x')

@narcole1919721
//but i was too lazy writing it//
Ha ha. You were lazy but still wrote a plethora of useless comments. Seems your lethargy is induced by the lack of any dependable proof for your claims.

//i wonder, do u really have guts to answer my challenges//
After you have furnished the proofs and I have thoroughly analyzed their veracity and very likely refuted them I can have a look at your challenges.

//or will u runaway after i answer and skip mine like usual.//
Lying again. I never ran away from any discussion. You have and many times. For example when I was pressing you on the question of speed of light in Quran. But stop the diversion, furnish your proofs.

Hehehe…i already kept the answers days ago and answer of other questions too…even the answers right in front of my eyes, but i was too lazy writing it, and decided to trigger u to keep pushing as ur reaction when i was questioning urs…i wonder, do u really have guts to answer my challenges…or will u runaway after i answer and skip mine like usual…x')

@narcole1919721
//Which is the lie?//
In this case your positing that I was apparently asking for some help.
//Which is the lie? //
The above mentioned lie.Anyway you are just lengthening the thread without any intent or ability to furnish a proof to your claims whether or not from Al Umdah.

//And are you up to my challenges?//
You haven't yet come with any proofs of your claims. And your messages indicate so far that you aren't capable of setting any challenges. Set them when you have finished the current task.

@mp11
Ali Sina wrote: " So if the intent is to advance Islam all lies are permissible."
And he's correct.A lie is a deliberate false statement…that Muhammad approved of.Destroying the quran is an act,not a false statement.

So why wouldn't you be able to desecrate the Koran in order to advance Islam?"
Your question's directed at the wrong person.Is there any muslim that have destroyed the quran in an act of deceit to advance Islam ,and if so,will his fellow muslims approve or kill him instantly? I think we all know the answer is the latter because history has failed to show otherwise.So ,then it's safe to say that there are certain limits to how a muslim can deceive infidels.However,you can disprove me easily by insulting and cursing Muhammad,Allah and his Quran.
Come on.don't be shy…go for it!

@narcole1919721
//Did you answer my questions or challenges?//
You forgot. The questions and challenges were from me. You were to answer because you made the claims. You failed in doing so and now have nowhere to hide your shame. Not surprising then that you would use diversionary tactics. Not an unknown strategy by Muslims, but unfortunately people have grown wise to it.

There is no much difference in ,"Let" and "Make" ,both these term had origin in slave mentality .Mohammed was the proponent of this .He did it in the name of "Allah" (his altar ego),the god of quresh of S.A ,who? is worst then a common man (he do not posses any power independent of mad Mohammed),hahaha.

@narcole1919721
If you don't have the proof to your claims of Muhammad's descent from Abraham or of Islamic discoveries etc then just say that. Why behaving like a turncoat? (Or may be that is your natural disposition).
//Whats the definition of sincerity then?//
You used the word before I did, you should know the meaning:-)

Well if we could marry today, we would have married today. Better than being lesbo or hyprocrite nun. we are waiting for parents ridha first and trying to seek each parents ridha. After both side ridha, then thats when we marry. Want me to invite you to wedding? ^^ dating is haram, ta'aruf is halal 🙂 well of course ur parents woud kill u if a man having a bf 'o'

@narcole1919721
//If you wanna help, then be sincere//
We are. We very sincerely point out errors and evils in Islam to you and others. People like you often dodge the question or the conclusion. Its your sincerity that is in question.

I pitty chuck you and muhammadiyah too…yep..you all have been led astray "

Yeah,they've all been led atray alright …by the devil you hint at? No..by Allah himself.
As you can see by the passage below,it's all Allah's will. http://quran.com/14/4
And We did not send any messenger except [speaking] in the language of his people to state clearly for them, and Allah sends astray [thereby] whom He wills and guides whom He wills. And He is the Exalted in Might, the Wise.

Don't you find it hilarious that she is a muslim woman with a BOYFRIEND yet she is defending ISLAM? And she still doesn't get that islam really is an arabic cult meant to spread arab superiority. My religious parents would KILL me if I had a boyfriend (not literally, but I'd get quite an earful) and she's bragging about it as if it's permissible in islam. Ah well better than wearing a burqa and practicing purdah eh?

Apart from your muhammadiyah(who/whatever that may be), none of us is on the wrong path. Your allah is; that is why it needs to be guided aright. If it is, then its followers are on the path of perdition.

@narcole
//When a man points a finger at someone else, he should remember that four of his fingers are pointing at himself//
Yeah, but even this is not the proof you claimed you have. Tch tch tch tch, empty words only.

@narcole1919721
//Hey…not the end…you didnt answer what is the definition of proof and which page in al umdah //
You couldn't bring the proof and instead dodging the questions. Generally dodging the question is a fallacious mechanism of hiding embarassment and defeat. You have lost it and you golly well know it.

//I love animals too..but i dont wanna be animal oh i pitty infidels too for being misled and misleading//
But Muslims need to be worse than animals for believing in Islam. Just see yourself, you aren't showing the intellect of a human after all. And the answering is mostly porcine from your part. That is why you should be pitied.

//Hehatesislam actually doesnt hate my islam. He only hates muhammadans from muhammadiyah //
Who is Hehatesislam?

@sanatan
Why you are asking blood money of jews? They are worst of creature. Do not you know Jews are enemy of Allah & believers. As per Quran

005.082
Strongest among men in enmity to the believers wilt thou find the Jews and Pagans; and nearest among them in love to the believers wilt thou find those who say, "We are Christians": because amongst these are men devoted to learning and men who have renounced the world, and they are not arrogant.

005.051
O ye who believe! take not the Jews and the Christians for your friends and protectors: They are but friends and protectors to each other. And he amongst you that turns to them (for friendship) is of them. Verily Allah guideth not a people unjust.

005.060
YUSUFALI: Say: "Shall I point out to you something much worse than this, (as judged) by the treatment it received from Allah? those who incurred the curse of Allah and His wrath, those of whom some He transformed into apes and swine, those who worshipped evil;- these are (many times) worse in rank, and far more astray from the even path!"

@narcole1919721
//So since i love you and i care about you, it means im innocent.//
In fact if you love and care about me, an infidel, it would mean you are an infidel too. Are you? And if you are then @ihateislam will not hate you :-). By the way I or @ihateislam hates Islam not muslims. Muslims we pity.

But end of the story is you couldn't bring proof to any of your claims.

Oh? So since i love you and i care about you, it means im innocent. And hehatesislam hates innocent muslims like me, means he has a bad heart and he does bad deed? Anyway since you care about me and want to be my foster dad means u have a good heart and innocent ^^ ♥ daddy chuck

Lol do you know the difference between muhajirin and ansar? Oh hijrah…they hijrah to medina…i want to hijrah to medina too oneday…grrr…so far i just could move back to another place for hijrah..place here isnt pure anymore…many mushrikin….and munafiqin…hm….anyway ansar means people in medina who welcomed and helped muhajirin with ikhlas….bilal was in muhajirin…hm..u obviously dont understand arabic and history

@narcole1919721
//Do you know the difference between bad heart and bad deed? //
Do you? Bad heart is generally a prerequisite to doing bad deed. In the Islamic point of view every person who doesn't believe in Islam or doesn't acknowledge Muhammad as a prophet (though correctly) has a bad heart. Such a person is never deemed innocent.

That's quite a declaration! You are a slave to the prophet of Allah who favors one group above all others and, coincidentally, you are proud to be in favored group. It's the classic master/slave mentality, with you as the self-serving, condescending, irrational master. Fiddle-dee-dee!

That can be taqiyah by a muhammadan who wants to lure the unwary into a false sense of security. Those who killed Ka'b called Muhammad unprintable names and it was alright for as long as their victim was deceived by it. Some of the 9/11 hijackers openly drank alcohol to reflect attention from themselves when it is said that alcohol is haram and those who drink it in this world will be denied the pleasure in 'paradise'. As martyrs the condition will be waived for them.
So Phoenix, a muhammadan can do that and more without letting it scratch his skin. They are master of deception.

Random books like the quran, hadtiths Muslim and Bukhari and the tafseer of Ibn Kathir? Those sheiks must be shaking their heads all the time such that nothing is ever retained in them. It explains why you are having difficulties.

You said that in your family line there are many races and your face can look like any race any time. What is the difference between you and a chameleon which changes color to suit the particular environment? As a matter of fact, you are the living proof of taqiyah as you keep deceiving people about your race/complexion.

Hmm…never been there 🙂 i only practice what i learn from my sheikhs. im banned to practice what i learn from random books alone. They are very protective of me and dont want me to get astrayed. Thank god i met such persons. any new knowledge that i found alone must report and check which is original and which bid3ah.

@narcole1919721
//Infidels who dont fight islam and dont do bad deeds are also innocent and haram to be //
And not believing in Islam and acknowledging that Muhammad was a prophet is a bad deed and hence no infidel is innocent. Your definition is the classical notion of innocence in Islam which implies only those infidels are innocent who accept the supremacy of islam, are subjugated, live in constant humiliation and pay Jizyah.

@narcole1919721
//Proven? What is the definition of proven? you want me to give you hadith? alright, ill show you. whats your address for me to visit?//
Tch tch tch tch. Poor you. Can't prove even an Islamic thinggy. Liar and a shameless one at that.

The chief of protocol to Muammar Gaddafi said that Gaddafi's mother was Jewish who converted to muhammadanism on marrying Gaddafi's father. Yet throughout his life Gaddafi was very disdainful of the Jewish people. That was a carry over from his father.

"BUT THERE IS ONLY ONE LAST PROPHET MU7AMMAD. WITH ONE REAL SECT".
Oh, No! Some muhammadans believe that other 'prophets' came after Muhammad ibn Amina. Mizra Ghulam Ahmad is one and Rashad Khalifah is another.
Up till now you have not been able to identify which is that "one real sect". It simply means that there is no such thing as each one lays claim to originality.

Bilal was a feed slave, who in spite of having a historic place in muhammadanism as the first to have called the azan, never became a close companion of the "prophet". It would seem that his slave background and African descent militated seriously against him.So he continued in the most subordinate or servile role of a crier which must have given him perpetual migraine.

@narcole1919721
//Daddy why not listen to me//
Because you have been proven to be a liar.

//trust me that there hadith you want in that.//
Give me the hadiths. The proof of the pudding is the pudding itself.

//*rolls on floor* i want more examples//
Declare apostasy and you will get more examples. That will indicate how sincere you are in your rolling on the floor. Anyway, your 3-4 claims in this thread has been thrashed and trashed.

Here's one method of detecting a muslim's sincere apostasy.He or she has to declare publicly that Muhammad was a psychopath,pedophile,rapist and a complete idiot.Desecrating the Quran is another way.
Now,can you pretend to be an apostate while still holding Muhammad as the most trusted human,believe in the infallibility of the Quran and do any of the above?

Also, Jizya is NOT something of the past. Muslims have been taking jizya from others on a regular basis…. they just don't call it 'jizya'. There are countless examples where money is going from non-Muslims to Muslims.

Hence for all practical purposes, Jizya and mistreatment of non-Muslim women are serious concerns and so we must work hard to eliminate Islam from the world!

Aside from there being nothing wrong with consenting adults to getting married and whatnot regardless of age difference, the main issue is WHY did muhammad marry a 9 year old? Let's think for a second; assuming "allah" actually commanded him to do so, don't you think if muhammad was the least bit honourable/sane he would attempt not to? I mean, he is supposedly the "best of mankind" right? He wouldn't have the right to question allah why he is asked to commit this atrocity? He wouldn't at least beg to his creator for a different command? Why would marrying a 9 year old be so damn important to allah? Well it's because muhammad and allah are one and the same! The pedophile took his bestie's daughter and married her at AGE 9 using the excuse "oh well allah said i can"! Talk about nauseating! But hey, muhammad is the "best of mankind" so whatever he says goes, right? Oh, I mean whatever "ALLAH" says goes.

@narcole1919721
//Only that way? what else?//
You asked for an example, I gave you two. Now don't fret.

//No dandruff on my shoulder. now yalla check the page//
Ha ha. No evidence coming. You have been beaten black and blue and like all true muslims you are in a denial mode now. As I said, stop the nuisance and quote the primary source not a Fiqh of a particular orthodoxy.

OMG MY BF IS 3 MONTHS YOUNGER THAN ME…IN 1400 YEARS, PEOPLE WILL WRITE ME AS COUGAR AND FALL SICK COS OF IT AND CHAOS AROUND THE WORLD COS OF ME 3 MONTHS OLDER! THREE MONTHS!!!!!! :"''' (PANIC) *SEEKS TIME MACHINE*

Being a follower of muhammad is better? I think not! What could be worse than someone who can bring themselves to MARRY a 9 year old child? SICK just SICK. Recall that his first wife was a 40 year old; so a cougar wasn't enough for the pervert he had to defile a poor innocent girl as well. Filthy! If that fact doesn't make you realize what a fiend muhammad was, nothing probably will!

I have more sympathy for her because she's a lady like me. I was just like her a few years back and I feel bad for most every muslim woman still trapped by the evils of islam. Hopefully she will realize what muhammad the false prophet really wanted: power. In fact, I took a good couple of years to break free from islam's shackles, starting at the age of 15. I can't say the same for my family, but I will do as much as I can to help eradicate islam in the coming years. Hopefully in our life time it will be a thing of the past.

@narcole1919721
//After you mention the page//
Which page? And why me? The proof of burden lies on your shoulder. The proof if any has to come from you those were your claims.

//In many ways like what, for example?//
Like by listening to logic or thinking deeply in a humane manner. :-). This is not important and not connected to your claims, or you show me how it is. Or do you think that truth shouldn't be spoken? After all thats what my Theology tells me tell the truth that benefits people.

@narcole1919721
//By seeing your comments its clear that you refuse to open the proof and make excuse that theres no proof, even without having to open it. How come you can guess whats inside a closed shell, without even opening it?//
By seeing your refusal to quote the reference it is clear that you don't have the grounds to prove any of your point. You simply want to dodge the point. I will go ahead and say that perhaps you don't even have a copy of al umdah where such references are mentioned. I challenged you long back but all that you have to show for it are trolls are nothing else. You have failed yet again. But you have succeeded to prove that you are a liar.

//And you didnt tell how//
Why should I? I am not propagating my theology or even defending it :-). But you will continue on this because that is all that you want. Diversion from the topics of discussion:-)

//See? the pearl ur looking for is in al umdah, and al umdah is the shell. but you refuse to open the shell by saying it isnt shell and no pearl in it. Now the only way to Prove whether the pearl is in umdah shell is by opening al umdah shell. not by saying al umdah isnt shell. //
It is not. Simple. Now quote the reference or get lost. You have lost this argument long back by back tracking from your claims. For example about Islamic discoveries which the infidels discovered much later (asked for a list which is still awaited), Allah in hand and veins (but didn't approve that that is also the case with dog's testicles) or the list of primary sources that traces the lineage of Muhammad from Abraham etc. As I said you didn't and you can't 🙂

By seeing your comments its clear that you refuse to open the proof and make excuse that theres no proof, even without having to open it. How come you can guess whats inside a closed shell, without even opening it? wow u must be magician 'O'

See? the pearl ur looking for is in al umdah, and al umdah is the shell. but you refuse to open the shell by saying it isnt shell and no pearl in it. Now the only way to Prove whether the pearl is in umdah shell is by opening al umdah shell. not by saying al umdah isnt shell.

@narcole1919721
//By seeing answer above, how does your god make things realized by you? in what method? //
In many ways. You won't understand them. By reading all your comments above it is now clear that you don't have an authentic proof that: 1. Muhammad came from Abraham and 2. Muhammad wasn't evil. Both the points have been established irrespective of what my God tells me :-). You have tried to steer the discussion away from these basic points and have failed. You have lied, fabricated stories and even used rhetoric… not much use, you see.

@narcole1919721
//If you cant tell the proof that your god told you that he has no name, means you dont know your gods name. if you can tell the proof, means you know//
Foolish really. You simply want to move away from the primary point of discussion :-). I have already told you that my God makes things realized. You aren't reading are you?

@narcole1919721
//Has proven what? what have you proven? what is your proof? what is the definition of proof? what is taquiya definition? is taquiya a form of inability to understand grammar to you? //
Read back my comment. If you can't comprehend simple English what right do you have to cast apprehensions regarding others understanding of English (or even Arabic).?

@narcole1919721
//Did u open al umdah yet? //
Al Umdah isn't the shell and it doesn't have the alleged pearl I am looking for. The shell I am looking for are the primary authentic text that you claim Al Umdah refers to. A claim that you haven't been able to substantiate with actually quoting the reference :-).

@narcole1919721
//When did you say that you dont know the name of your god? //
I didn't say that I don't know, I said it has no name. This is too fine a point for your Islamic aqal to grasp. If it has no name, the point of my knowing the name doesn't arise.

//Realization happens all the the time. and your god isnt bound by time? so which is true, all time, or no time? //
No the God in my Theology isn't bound by time. It is timeless, shapeless, non-local. Once you have understood these concepts you would know which is true.

@narcole1919721,
//Lol ur answer was see answer above. so, when i asked what is proof that ur god told you that he has no name, your answer is see answer above//
That is the poverty of your knowledge of English and languages in general. "See answer above" doesn't mean "Same answer above". You keep on proving what a fool you are. Once you see the above answer, it should have been clear that the second question doesn't arise. The first answer shows that to not to have told you that the entity is nameless is silly. And since that is silly the other point of the God not telling that it has no name is also silly. I explained in a follow up question that realizations come all the time. My God makes things realized to me, yours don't. My Theological God is not bound by names, places, times, languages etc but yours is.

@narcole1919721
//Who was looking for the name of my god? Its clear that my gods name is Allah//
Nobody was. Your alleged God, by naming itself, has proven that it is no God. Else there wouldn't have been different names for that entity in different language, Elohim, Ishwar, God, Allah etc.etc..This is a sufficient proof that a name is a human invention/convention.

// i was asking the name of your god which you dont even know yet and asked me to find in Quran//
More lying. I didn't ask you to find the name of my God in Quran. Once a liar always a liar. I told you God has no name. So the simple point is why do you lie about such a small matter when the point has been proven that Muhammad was an evil person? The simple answer is obscurantism, which is also a mechanism of Taqiya. Talk about something useless, meaningless so that the real point is lost in transit.

@narcole1919721
//its not me who produce the source. But the source itself. //
And still no source :-). You have been caught lying and now have no escape left but to troll.

//ull deny it since you dont see the real source directly.//
You haven't given any.

//if you want primary authentic source, you have to see the primary authentic source yourself.//
Which you are yet to refer to. You only talk, as far as real evidence is concerned there is none:-).

//im telling where you could find the authentic source.//
You aren't telling me what the authentic source is. And this is what I meant when I said : "Did you? No. Can you? No.". You have simply proven each of my assertions right 🙂

// i answer its in shell in ocean. but u think im talking about ocean, not the pearl. //
But I am asking you which shell and you turn dumb. You aren't even pointing to the correct ocean and the shells I have opened (and I have pointed them in my earlier comments) don't contain the said pearl.

//You want me to feed you takoyaki from my hand? //
Not if you haven't made the claim that you can cook 'takoyaki'. I am not even asking you to feed me, but write down the recipe. Are you able to do that? No. Why? Because your cooking skills are a myth :-). You have been busted that is why you talk of meaningless allegories.

@snowflake,
In certain Islamic countries, be it female or male, once you're married to a muslim you're obligated to convert to Islam. There's no other way because the law says so. I am not sure whether it is in the Koran that teaches that. This looks like one sided and it is arbitrary to the core. And there's nobody who could do anything about it.

@ihateislam,
Yes, yes, yes, I absolutely agree with this. Most Arabs are uncredible lot, nevertheless are good at making false claims as baseless as ever. I just can't imagine the possibility of them making anything right.

You've simply been brainwashed by islam into thinking Jews are the enemy. Newsflash; islamists are paranoid of ANYONE who is not muslim. Yahudi is the arabic term for jew is it not? So yes, you have blamed jews for the pitiful actions of Arab Muslims who are really just doing what is expected from a totalitarian, hateful religion called islam. They hate non-arabs and use non-arab muslims to keep bragging they are the fastest growing religion when in fact they believe they are better than you. Don't be surprised; just see islam for what it really is and fight against this brutal regime.

Are you so ignorant of the very religion you defend? If you are an unfortunate muslim woman, you are expected to wear hijabs/burqas, not meet with outsider males (nonmaharram) and definitely not keep boys as friends! There really is nothing wrong with having one, mind you. It's just that islam prohibits such normal activities. I'm shocked you didn't know all this. You seem pretty shocked at the absurdity, but it is islam after all. What did you expect?

Lol ur answer was see answer above. so, when i asked what is proof that ur god told you that he has no name, your answer is see answer above that my Allah didnt tell me that 'gods name is a work of man'? is above answer proof that ur god told you that he has no name?

When did you say that you dont know the name of your god? when you couldnt answer when did your god tell you that he has no name.
Realization happens all the the time. and your god isnt bound by time? so which is true, all time, or no time?

Who was looking for the name of my god? Its clear that my gods name is Allah. i was asking the name of your god which you dont even know yet and asked me to find in Quran. pffft….hello? its your god…x'D

Produce? its not me who produce the source. But the source itself. if its me who brings, ull deny it since you dont see the real source directly. if you want primary authentic source, you have to see the primary authentic source yourself. you are asking where the authentic source, im telling where you could find the authentic source. if you are asking where pearl, i answer its in shell in ocean. but u think im talking about ocean, not the pearl.
And if you want takoyaki, go to japan, or seek takoyaki recipe and cook yourself. You want me to feed you takoyaki from my hand? Wheres the money, ill buy it. or if you're afraid ill runaway with your takoyaki money, then escort me to market.

See now that's funny! According to islam you are sinning by even having a boyfriend. BTW you shouldn't be ashamed of arab racists but should be ashamed of following and promoting a false and evil religion such as islam. I'm not blaming you per se since I was in your shoes not too long ago. However, quite a bit of argument and logic should have waken you up by now! What do you mean "yahudi" words? Are you really blaming Jews for the false pride of Arabs as well? Islam really messes with the brain doesn't it!?

@narcole1919721
//and your answer is, isnt silly that 'my' Allah didnt tell 'me' about that 'your' god told 'you' that 'your' god has no name?//
My answer was that isn't it silly that your Allah didn't tell you that God's name is a work of man? You have problem reading simple English (even)? Tch tch. The second question doesn't arise if the first question itself is silly? You are plain out of depth here.

Lets recheck the question. What is proof that 'your' god told 'you' that 'he' has no name? and your answer is, isnt silly that 'my' Allah didnt tell 'me' about that 'your' god told 'you' that 'your' god has no name?

Is it ur takoyaki or you dont understand english grammar?

Omg if you cnt understand english grammar, then how about other languages grammar? 'O'

@narcole1919721
//And what is the definition of taqiyah part in here? you are seeking where the hadith, i said in al umdah.//
THIS is the Taqiyah part. I didn't ask you where the hadith is mentioned. I asked in which hadiths or Quranic ayahs the genealogy is mentioned 🙂

//i said in al umdah. you said no hadith in al umdah,//
Read back what I said. I didn't say that there is no hadith in al umdah. Here catching your lie, this is exactly what I said : "I have already checked Shahi Hadiths from Muslim and Bukhari . You are the claimant here so the proof of burden lies on you. Just mention the authentic hadith or the Quranic reference. Even the ones that your copy of al umdah refers to. Easy isn't it? "

Following majlis-e talim makes you not only a superstitious fool but a liar as well.

//when you find the page number same like mine, thats when its proven.//
See I told you, you won't and you can't produce any authentic primary source.

//go tabayun for the truth//
Which is what I just did. Exposed both your lie and you myth.

@narcole1919721
//And what is the proof that god's name is a work of a man?//
Isn't it silly that your Allah didn't even tell you that?

//And what is proof that god told you that he has no name?//
See answer above 🙂

And look back on this thread to understand what is the primary problem in debating with a Muslim. You have tried to move so far away from the original assertion that Muhammad was an evil person and so are his true followers. And in avoiding that you have proved that assertion true:-)

And what is the definition of taqiyah part in here? you are seeking where the hadith, i said in al umdah. you said no hadith in al umdah, i said check urself from page after page. u said no proof in al umdah, i ask, did you check al umdah. when you find the page number same like mine, thats when its proven. why not start checking? 🙂 go tabayun for the truth 😉

@narcole1919721
//Lol now u dont understand english grammar. I said i could tell u page in al umdah which wrote authentic hadith by prophet.//
Here comes the Taqiyah part. You did tell me that you can tell which page in al umdah. But did you tell me the page number? No. Did I ask for the page number? No. So what did I ask from you? To quote the reference which has been quoted in your copy of Shahr Al Umdah so that we can directly look up those authentic sources. Do I think you can quote authentic primary sources (as mentioned above)? No.

Lol now u dont understand english grammar. I said i could tell u page in al umdah which wrote authentic hadith by prophet. now how come u say theres no hadith about it in al umdah if u dont even know the page and havent checked yet? x'D

@narcole1919721
//The first ayat in quran is 'BY THE NAME OF GOD' //
Which proves that Quran is a work of man 🙂

//how come ur theology doesnt know the most important thing//
Poor Islamic aql at work again. Names are coined by human being. God is free from any such need. It is the least important thing to God and learned people know it just as well, but may be it is an important thing in the Islamic Theology which is rather immature.

@narcole1919721
//You havent checked all. How many hadiths you have read?//
More than you can dream of reading.

//i can tell you which page in al umdah. but i guess u can find it by checking page after page, //
tch tch. Your dishonesty peeps out now in full view :-). I didn't ask you about al umdah, I asked you about the authentic reference that is quoted in your copy of al Umdah :-). Did you? No. Can you? No. And I have already what is meant by authentic, either mentioned in Quran or in the Sunnah or any independent primary source from the time of Muhammad (For example a 7th century Greek or Jew work that gives the genealogy).

You havent checked all. How many hadiths you have read? i can tell you which page in al umdah. but i guess u can find it by checking page after page, so that you can read directly from the beginning till the end. then ull get details and complete explanation .^^.

@narcole1919721
//Yep, al umdah mentioned primary source you want from hadith. how about you go check//
I have already checked Shahi Hadiths from Muslim and Bukhari :-). You are the claimant here so the proof of burden lies on you. Just mention the authentic hadith or the Quranic reference. Even the ones that your copy of al umdah refers to. Easy isn't it?

@narcole1919721
//Wow..i just heard it.//
Thats why you should look outside your majlis e talim:-). So little do you know!!

//'O' whos the founder of ur theology?//
God. And on its authority I repeat since I am saying the truth and saying truth isn't sinful in my Theology so Muhammad was an evil person and saying that doesn't make me a sinner.

@narcole1919721
//All written in al umdah//
By al umdah, do you mean Sharh al Umdah? Which is a Fiqh of Hanbali and which leads back to Salafist etc. As I said, later day inventions don't count. You have to mention a primary source, say Quran or a Shahi Hadith (better a Sunnah). If you can't, then it simply means that you or whoever traces the genealogy hasn't followed authentic sources.

@narcole1919721
//Okay, after you learn arabic//
So you aren't upto the challenge. It is a list which doesn't depend on the language:-). You can simply say discovery d1, discoverer XYZ in the year ABCD, reference Q:M:N.

@narcole1919721
//Thats cos u dont know what we know//
Nobody knows what you know, including you :-). I challenge you to list them down here with the year of discovery and the Quranic reference which helped in those discovery. And then, if the discovery is correct, we can match it with the dates of the same discovery in non Islamic texts.

@narcole1919721
//And you are doing fitnah toward him. which means ur sin is more than killing humans in the world???//
What fitnah? Evil must be exposed, so if I am exposing Muhammad it is a good thing not a fitnah. You should do a tauba for following such an evil person.

@mp11
//Whether that has a theological basis is irrelevant. //
It is definitely relevant. When A Christian says that the Bible is verbatim from God then (s)he is simply unaware of the Theology or doctrine. When a Muslim says the same about Quran (s)he definitely says it with the conviction of the doctrine. That is the primary point that Sina made.

//But the point that some jews do hold the Torah to be god's word has been demonstrated in the post.//
The key points here are: 1. Some Jews and 2. Torah isn't the full Tanakh or Hebrew Bible.

@narcole1919721
//many infidels deny what moslem scientists found since they have no idea what moslems talking about. //
You are right for once. Nobody has any idea what moslems talk about:-). As far as denying what moslem scientists found, why don't you list them down here with the year of discovery and the Quranic reference which helped in those discovery?

@narcole1919721
//remember how chuck denied theres name of Allah in hand and veins shape? //
And I still deny the same. No Allah in my or anybody's right hand:-). And if you have to superimpose that on somebody's right hand fingers, however odd it might look, then I can do the same with a dog's testicles applying the same standards of 'likeness'.

@narcole1919721
//And prophet Mu7ammad and Jesus came from prophet Abraham.//
Give the genealogy from Abraham till Muhammad. Muhammad's genealogy can only be traced back to Adnan. From them on there are no accounts from Muhammad's day. Later day Islamic theologians have concocted various ancestries from Adnan to Ismail just to establish Muhammad;s relation with Abraham. Or you can come with a reference from Quran or Sira.

//When Adam and Eve fell from heaven, Adam fell to India, while Eve fell to africa.//
Evidence. You have a poor habit of making claims without any proof. Like you found Allah in the world map!!

@narcole1919721,
//Killing 1 innocent human, has the same sin of killing all humans in the world.//
So thats that for Muhammad. He killed innocents and his followers are responsible for killing and plundering innocents.

*laughs* didnt i say that im of mixed races? in my family lines, there various races and my face can look like any race anytime. im not surprised that strangers couldnt recognize what i am exactly for first sight. my bf is from mixed races too. so if we have a child, she/he cant be a racist cos we are from mixed of races around the world, and we are objective. although i heard that i also have arab ancestor, but that never made me defend all arabs as holier than others. wherever comunity i go to, im welcomed as part of them too. indeed im ashamed of arabs generation who sinned but trying to defend their bad deeds by saying arabs are the best. such words are yahudi words.

Thats fine, my point was the orthodox judaism is the only form of judaism officially recognized by the only majority jewish state in the world.

Yes, there are other sources -just like Muslims may have hadiths. But the point that some jews do hold the Torah to be god's word has been demonstrated in the post. Ali Sina says that jews believe their texts to be written by humans which may be true of some jews (reform judaism for example) but not of other jews.

" the premise of all discourse is that the Torah was written by God and dictated by God to Moses at Sinai" – Jacob Neusner, Theology of the Oral Torah: Revealing the Justice of God, p.374

This means verbatim.

Finally, the opinion of christians is key here because I am responding to Ali Sina's assertion that Christians do not believe that their texts were written by God. Many in fact do. Whether that has a theological basis is irrelevant.

I think what Sina and many others want to do is to sharpen the contradictions. Islam must be the "other" as much as possible, evidence be damned.

You are indeed a slave. A self-delusional one at that. Hate to break it to ya, but neither are Arabic muslims anything special, nor are any muslims following the path of righteousness. All religions are flawed in one way or the other, islam being one of the most flawed. Keep dreaming about Arab supremacy; only Arabs like you agree. You should know how barbaric your nation's treatment is towards women, non-muslims and non-arab muslims (which is really laughable). If you still think Arabs are in any way "chosen" people and that the world is "grateful" for "enlightening" the world, you have much to learn about morality and reality. If anything, Arabs are blamed for spreading the disease that is Islam, but its days are numbered. Please seek mental help and/or treatment for the time being, you could really use it! 🙂

Why are you arguing with the shameless slave? He's not lying about the Arab-Muslim mentality. They will tell non-Arab muslims that they are inferior because that is the vision of Islam. You, as a non-Arab, represent the sheeple who worship a god of an Arabic origin. It took me a couple of years with Ali Sina's guiding words to realize what Islam really is. As a non-Arab, this should be easier for you to understand. Think: why would "allah" reveal the world's "real" religion in a language that is hardly spoken by the majority of people in the world? Because MadMuhammad was an Arab! To promote islam, they want us all to learn Arabic! It is world domination these muslims seek, nothing more! Don't be a submissive imbecile to the twisted Arabs; they will recruit nonArabs just to say "islam is the fastest growing religion" but look at their treatment of non-Arab muslims! Disgusting and pathetic!

To be honest, im starting to doubt that ur a christian. you dont show any of christian knowledge. but i think agracean is real christian from her christian knowledge and christian attitude. I know ur here for against islam, but theres no sign that ur in christian group. i know christianity teaching. but u dont represent any.

How come Muhammadiyah who claims that they only follow Muhammad, and you who claim Muhammadanism/Muhammadans who 'actually' follow Muhammad, are not same? Muhammadiyah claims that its them who really 'actually' follows Muhammad….hmm

Lol of course quran did mention her name and her story, but didnt tell to details how slim she was and her weight. *rolls eyes* necessary details explained in hadith. and ofcourse hadith explained how tall adam and we all will be resurrected as tall as adam. and darwinism concept in animal ancestry is shallow. its not animal who could become human. its humans who could become animals as CURSE since the humans acted like beasts. its not related to any ancestry.

At the rate you are going, you will soon deny your birth name.
Just as there is darwinism, which means those who subscribe to the theory propounded by Darwin, so does muhammadanism mean whatever Muhammad ibn Amina propounded.

You are a muhammadan. I referred you to the verse in Bukhari where Muhammad himself talked about "FOLLOWERS OF MUHAMMAD".
You had earlier on referred to 'darwinians' who are followers of Charles Darwin. The same thing applies to the followers of Muhammad. They are muhammadans.

You can't hide ur racial prejudice. The quran does not mention Eve even a single time. I have many versions and none of them says something about Eve or where she landed on her 'fall'. Was it a soft or hard landing? Muhammadanism is excellent in manufacturing idiocies. Adam is said to have been so tall that his head scraped the sky and that is why men are bald headed. Was whatever created him so stupid that he/it didn't know what height Adam should have had to avoid that collision? On darwinism, I do not believe in it but muhammadans do. It is only by the darwinian evolution that a human being (Jew) can become an ape or swine. Darwinians believe that man's pedigree is rooted in anthropoids. The quran upholds this by returning man to its 'ancestry'. When you deny the darwinian theory, you are exposing your ignorance of the quran. Christians do not believe in myths. That is the province of muhamadanism. The story of Adam and Eve falling from the sky is a myth, pure and simple.

Infidels science? and where infidels learn science from before? moslems. and if infidels scientists are so smart, why all of them made agreement among them that none of them could speak to public about what happened before bing bang? thats bcos they are afraid to show their ignorance and public will doubt their phd. and no one would listen to them anymore.

Proof that they're not? obviously. never found in my majlis ta3lim nor kitab. where do you learn? reading alone from infidels net article? ohhhh…i learn in real life, with real sheikhs, with real kitabs, with real arabic sources. what about you

If your assessment or conclusion is based on the findings of muhammadan scientists, then I have nothing to worry about because such findings are regarded as scientific nonsense. It is 'infidel science' that has built even the most 'holy' mosques in Mecca and Medina. What is there to talk about muhammadan science? NOTHING except if one wants to be the laughing stock of the scientific community.

Who said quran didnt mention eve? did u count how many? either for the word or the story. hm? ur a christian but didnt know why adam and eve fell to different continent? u call urself a christian but talking like a darwinist who thinks first humans ancestor was monkey who then became african woman?

Well first you need to learn arabic first in order to read arabic codes in dna. and second you need to learn biology especially genetics. remember how chuck denied theres name of Allah in hand and veins shape? why? cos he cant read arabic and refuse to learn. many infidels deny what moslem scientists found since they have no idea what moslems talking about.

There is no doubt that muhamadanism is as brain damaging as hard drugs. Just listen to yourself: Adam and Eve fell from heaven. If that happened, why did they have to fall in different continents and Adam had to go in search of Eve? Should he not have know where she was? Has it occurred to you that while the quran mentions Adam, it says nothing about Eve? Talking about her is an innovation which is abhorrent to every true muhammadan.

What a preposterous assumption! Where is the scientific proof that Arabic is in the dna of every human? I know for certain that it is NOT IN MINE. Were it to be universal, then it would not have been peculiar to the Arabic race. It is clear that in spite of claiming to be of mixed races, you want a link to the Arabs to counter what Slave mentality posted that those goons are the best in hie estimation.

And prophet Mu7ammad and Jesus came from prophet Abraham. While prophet Abraham didnt come from saudi arabia. When Adam and Eve fell from heaven, Adam fell to India, while Eve fell to africa. adam kept searching eve until arab. And Eve died in jeddah, arab. jeddah itself means grandmother. so we all came from Adam, from mud. while Iblis made from fire and against God since he thinks FIRE is the best element. And mud from earth. what did god say? fakhruj. get out from heaven. here isnt place for vain takabbur person.

Lol what race adam do you think…pfft…arabic language, is official language in arab countries. but arabic language had existed even before adam was created. arabic language was and is universal language in islamic world. arabic is in each of humans blood of every race. its in every humans dna. its not related to certain race. its just a coincidence that its named ARABIC, since arab uses the language officially. capisce?

Poor child, you don't know that the Arabs have the prime of place in the muhammadan paradise. Muhammad designated his favorite daughter as having the next highest place in his paradise and she was Arab.He said every body should love the Arab unconditionally because he was Arab, the quran was 'revealed' in Arabic and the language of paradise, which actually is hell, is Arabic. For that reason, the first how many caliphs, both rightly and wrongly guarded, were all Arabs.
There is no way that you can win the battle against the Arabs as far as muhammadanism is concerned; not when they are the custodians of the 'holy' places and hold the monopoly of heading the ummah. If you feel that they are wrong in what they are doing, then remove the Kaaba from Mecca.
The Arabs are doing the rest of you a favor by sharing what was meant to be exclusive to them with you.
By the way, I don't think that the Saudis are guilty of associating with the 'infidels' any more than you are. You are living in the midst of the 'infidels'. Can you now see your hypocrisy?

Poor child, you don't know that the Arabs have the prime of place in the muhammadan paradise. Muhammad designated his favorite daughter as having the next highest place in his paradise and she was Arab.He said every body should love the Arab unconditionally because he was Arab, the quran was 'revealed' in Arabic and the language of paradise, which actually is hell, is Arabic. For that reason, the first how many caliphs, both rightly and wrongly guarded, were all Arabs.
There is no way that you can win the battle against the Arabs as far as muhammadanism is concerned; not when they are the custodians of the 'holy' places and hold the monopoly of heading the ummah. If you feel that they are wrong in what they are doing, then remove the Kaaba from Mecca.

Thank god im decendant of mixed races, so im not racist like you. whatever good deeds arabs did in the past, thats bcos of hidayah to their hearts. i repeat god doesnt see a person from look and where the persons from, what Allah sees in someone is his heart. Are you denying that? Even before prophet died, he lectured his family to protect themselves from sins, by having prophet as family, doesnt mean they can do sins as they like and think they could enter heaven cos of relationship with prophet. no. its heart that will determine. ur staining ur heart with takabur. are you aware?

@Narcile
If Islam flourished all around the world it is just because Arabian people. Allah was aware only Arabian are most capable as protectors & Propagators of Islam that is why Allah chose their language the "Arabian language" to send divine revelations in form of Quran. Today, you Non-Arab Muslims ( Indian, Pakistani, Bangladeshi, Afghans, Iraki and Irani etc) are Muslim and follower of prophet & Allah it was the mercy of Arabian people who brought your forefathers into Islam and saved their generation (Who are like you) from hell fire. World will be always grateful of Arabian and their culture which enlightened the world.

And did u read in kitab about a taylor of zhalim king? he asked whether its okay to make dress for zhalim king. is it halal? no, its haram. he would get the sins of the kings zhalimness when wearing the dress. doing legal job for helping zhalim person is haram. did you notice how far arab kingdom from prophet teaching is? do you think the arab prophet will be proud of them disobeying his teaching? do you think the arab prophet will be proud of you defending zhalim arab whos betraying his teaching? u call urself slave of prophet?

Slave, i hope ull do taubat soon to Allah. Allah dislikes persons who defend zhalim persons, especially cos of race or nation. Im critisizing arab saudi kingdom cos they have gone astrayed from prophets teaching. And they have become slaves of infidels while disguising under moslems flag. Anyone who defends zhalim person will get the share of the sin. Now, how many arab sinners ur defending. Did you notice what kind of sins they have been doing until now? And what are you doing? Keep defending them cos of same race? Not critisizing in order to remind them to come back to prophets teaching, and fix mistakes they already made?

In other words, all those who are crafty or encourage craftiness are bound for hell. I pity Muhammad who authorized that Ka'b should be lied to so that muhammadan assailants could kill him. Both the killers who used deception and their boss who approved it are now dancing with satan.
That is your own verdict. Being a muhammadan, you know better about this aspect.

@Narcole
//Killing 1 innocent human, has the same sin of killing all humans in the world//
Then why blood money for the killing of a Muslim sixteen times more than Killing of a innocent Hindu in Saudi Arabia?

Most of the information in this article are right, but there are some flaws. I am not saying that because I want to defend Islam, I just don't like to see wrong information given to the readers. Jizya is something of the past, it is not taking place anymore nowadays in the Islamic countries, because the Christians also serve in the army.
The other point, Mo didn't lie when he said it is not in Islam that the wife is not allowed to see her Christian family. In fact, a Muslim man is allowed to marry a Christian or a Jewish woman, and this woman is not obligated to convert to Islam….but the Muslim woman does not have the same right, because as we know women in Islam don't have all the rights given to men.
This is the law of Shari'a….but in our time, many Muslims insist that thier wives must convert to Islam, although their Islamic law permits the woman of the book to remain in her original religion…there are some Muslim men, however, who don't care about religion, allow their Christian wives to go to the church and practice their religion. That is what I know .

I remember sahabat nabi qais ibn sa'ad. he used to have sly character before converting islam. he said If it were not for Islam I would have used my craftiness to outwit all the Arabs.If I did not hear the Prophet say craftiness and deciet reside in hell, I would have been the craftiest man of the nation.

@test
Few days before I watched in the news that a shopkeeper said that he was not killed by Muslim terrorist because he said them "he is a Muslim". When terrorist asked to the shopkeeper his name to told them "Muslim name" although he was a Hindu. Was it taqiyah?

All the things I have done come from my ' heart and mind' which are very clean.That is why I have been able to "peel the layers" of muhammadanism and see it for what it actually is. Had I depended on your advice I would have been seriously misguided.

I never refused to guide you. you alway refused my hints. how many i gave already? like, dont read book alone, clean ur heart and mind toward others, tabayyun, get real source, check arabic words, dont quote someone that is called muslim, dont believe countries who are called islamic countries but with infidel systems, dont watch tv too much cos media is already bribed with money to slander….its all from ur heart and mind first. if ur heart is clean, ur words and ur view clean too. If heart is dirty mouth and actions dirty too. what u see is dirty too.

Hmm…its weird that we never heard word taquiya and never heard concept of taquiya as lying. could it be, the ones who keep mentioning taquiya…taquiya.. are lying, and the taquiya users themselves….or…hm…maybe they like takoyaki

ralfellis,
Thanks for the info on the 'Enlightenment Koran'. I never heard of it until now. The book is so hilarious and I strongly recommend it. For instance sura 2:190 says "BUT DO NOT FIGHT FOR GOD, FOR GOD IS OMNIPOTENT AND ABLE TO LOOK AFTER HIMSELF. HE IS A BIG BOY NOW—-IDOLATORY IS NOT AS BAD AS YOU THINK AND HAS INSPIRED MANY GREAT WORKS OF ART; IT IS MUCH MORE INTERESTING THAN THE ENDLESS DESIGNS AND CALLIGRAPHY OF THE BELIEVERS.
Sura 2:193 "BE FRIENDS WITH THE JEWS AND CHRISTIANS UNTIL THERE IS NO PERSECUTION AGAINST RELIGION–".
Every muhammadan is invited to own a copy and study it assiduously.

@mp11
//By the way, orthodox judaism is the only recognized form of judaism in Israel Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religion_in_Israel //
Quoting from the same wiki link:
Israel has no entrenched constitution, but freedom of religion is anchored in law. While the Basic Laws of Israel that serve in place of a constitution define the country as a "Jewish state," these Basic Laws, coupled with Knesset statutes, decisions of the Supreme Court of Israel, and various elements of the common law current in Israel, also protect free practice of religion in the country.

//This is untrue, orthodox jews believe the Torah to be the literal word of god to moses (source :http://www.che.org/members/ethics/docs/1424/Jewish%20I.pdf//
By Torah, I understand you only mean the five books of Moses. They aren't the be all and end all of Judaism. So Sina is correct. Jews don't hold all their sacred texts as direct revelation from God. It seems that you didn't read the links completely which you yourself gave.

//As for Christians, approximately one third of American Christians believe the bible is the literal word of god//
Where is the doctrinal presumption in this case? There is a significant difference between a doctrine and an opinion. This is very dissimilar from what a Muslim must believe about Quran.

Out of the 73 sects, you have refused to say the one you follow which is the correct path. Do that and we will contact it. For now we still remain free to choose anyone that attracts our fancy. They all mean and preach the same thing.

Muhammad ibn Amina said so himself. He drank fermented wine, used it for ablution and called it a great purifier. He had any woman he wanted irrespective of her marital status so much so that Aisha said she used to look own on those women until the verse permitting adultery was 'revealed'. Muhammad said all muhammadans must follow his sunnah. Drinking and philandering were part of his sunnah.

Taqqiya does not exist – go to an ex-muslim site like the council of ex-muslims and they have never heard of it.

Jihadists are quite proud and openly state what they want and justify their actions through religion. They never use Taqqiyah which is why we have a plethora of videos of Muslims declaring their intentions in great detail.

Taqqiya is more a way of throwing suspicion on any Muslim who does not agree with the jihadists. Its very effective and its also called poisoning the well.

Dawla? you mean daulat. read dictionary more what daulat means. anyway no hadith about that. its slogan used by certain sect. some even translated deen as mosque *rolls eyes* please note this. first, get right source. the closer water to source then the purer the water is. second, by not mastering arabic well, ur effort in quoting non arabic source is useless.

Ali Sina's point was NOT to prove "that the command is for any and all killing while it in fact it concerns unlawful killing"!! That was not even the topic. The topic was the UNEQUAL treatment of Muslim and non Muslim in the same situation! If a non-Muslim kills a Muslim for an unjust cause (the interpretation of which is up to the Muslim!!) he should be killed, but if a Muslim kills an unbeliever he should NOT be killed for retaliation Qesas) because "A believer shall not slay a believer for the sake of an unbeliever, nor shall he aid an unbeliever against a believer."

So If a Coptic Christian kills a Muslim man in a fist fight he will be put to death. But if a Muslim kills a Coptic Christian in a fist fight he shall not be put to death because no Muslim shall slay another Muslim for the sake of a non-Muslim!" That was Ali Sina's whole point and it stands!

Dear Sister,
"Islam means peace. if no peace means not islam. A real muslim has peace in heart, and his behavior reflects the heart. "

The root word for Islam is “al-Silm,” which means “submission” or “surrender.” let think for a moment on your thought if Islam means peace then Muslim means should be Peaceful. but Read Surah 3 Ayath 64 Qul ya ahla alkitabi taAAalaw ila kalimatin sawa-in baynana wabaynakum alla naAAbuda illa Allaha wala nushrika bihi shay-an wala yattakhitha baAAduna baAAdan arbaban min dooni Allahi fa-in tawallaw faqooloo ishhadoo bi-anna muslimoona
Say: "O People of the Book! come to common terms as between us and you: That we worship none but Allah; that we associate no partners with him; that we erect not, from among ourselves, Lords and patrons other than Allah." If then they turn back, say ye: "Bear witness that we (at least) are Muslims (bowing to Allah's Will). here Muslim means Bowing to Allah will but not say it means peace.

The supposed "just cause" claus changes absolutely NOTHING. Still if a Muslim kills a non Muslim he is punished less than if a Muslim kills a non Muslim for a similar reason. That was the whole point and that point stands, with or without the "just cause" claus because the most important point that you are trying to divert us from is the part that says: "A believer shall not slay a believer for the sake of an unbeliever, nor shall he aid an unbeliever against a believer.” So no believer according to Muhammed should be punished by death penalty for the sake of killing an unbeliever, while an unbeliever should be punished by death unless he can prove he had a just reason for killing the Muslim (what ever that means!!) That proves that the life of a non-Muslim is worth less than that of a Muslim, a fact that is reflected in the penal code of every Sharia-compliant government in this world and it is silly to deny.

Beside "just cause" is completely vague and up for interpretation. As we know Muslims have a very fast and loose interpretation of what a "just cause" to kill someone could be (that too depends on the victim's and perpetrator's religion) as Ali Sina showed us an example of in his answer. The fact that the amount of blood money for killing of people of different faith is different in Islam with blood of muslim men being the most expensive of all closes the case! Don't even try to throw red haring here to distract from the main point which stands fast and sound! Muhammed was by NOT a decent and just man and even his notions of "just cause" were utterly twisted and sickening by any civilized standards. Case closed, REALLY!

As for Christians or Jews believing the Bible to be the literal verbatim word of God that is completely untrue. At no point in history did Christians or Jews believe that the Bible was dictated word by word by God, except some specific parts of it were for example it say "….Thus saith The Lord!" Other wise the books are called by and attributed to the name of their authors (ex. The Book of Isaiah, The Book of Daniel, The Gospel according to Mark, etc…). and only the general inspiration is attributed to God or The Holy Spirit. There is no comparable "dictation theory" of revelation in Christianity and Judaism. Such a notion is completely alien to Christianity or Judaism.

First pilar is faith in god. by iman toward god heart is peaceful. and behave in peaceful way. whats the use doing sholat, hajj, even faith in angels but heart is rotten? its not good deeds that will make someone enter heaven, but peaceful heart.

It did not clear you means there is more than 73 sects are available in Islam. And you mentioned above not by Name? Muslim doctrine is often summarized in "Six Articles of Faith." According to this list, to be a Muslim one must believe in:

One God;
The angels of God;
The books of God, especially the Qur'an;
The prophets of God, especially Muhammad;
The Day of Judgment (or the afterlife); and
The supremacy of God's will (or predestination)

Most of them follow all these six articles and also offer Namaz, keep roza, donate zakat and go to Hajj means they are following islam and they are true Muslim but it is you who are saying that me sect is different you beloved Mu-hum-mad also told my ummah will be in 73 sect and only one sect will be in jannat. So all these make a great vague do you think you will be in Jannat?

56. Ka'biyah:
Followers of abu-qasim Abdullah ibn-Ahmed ibn-Mahmud al-Banahi known as al-Ka'bi. They believe that Allah does not see Himself nor anyone else except in the sense that He knows himself and others.

57. Jubbaiyah:
Followers of abu-'Ali al-Jubbai. They believe that Allah obeys His servants when he fulfils their wish.

58. Bahshamiyah:
Followers of abu-Hashim. They believe that one, who desires to do a bad deed, though may not do it, commit infidelity and deserve punishment.

59. Ibriyah:
They believe that Holy Prophet (pbuh) was a wise man but not a prophet.

60. Zanadiqiyah:
They believe that the incident Miraj was a vision of the Holy prophet (pbuh) and that we can see Allah in this world.

61. Qabariyya:
They do not believe in the punishment of grave.

62. Hujjatiya:
They do not believe in the punishment for deeds on the grounds.

63. Fikriyya:
They believe that doing Dhikr and Fikr (Remembering and thinking about Allah) is better than worship.

66. Rajiýah:
They believe that Hazrat Ali ibn-abi-Talib will return to this world.

67. Ahadiyah:
They believe in the Fardh (obligations) in faith but deny the Sunnah.

68. Radeediyah:
They believe that this world will live forever.

69. Satbiriyah:
They do not believe in the acceptance of repentance.

70. Lafziyah:
They believe that Quran is not the word of God but only its meaning and essence is the word of God. Words of Quran are just the words of the narrator.

71. Ashariyah:
They believe that Qiyas (taking a guess) is wrong and amounts to disbelief.

72. Bada'iyah:
They believe that obedience to Ameer is obligatory no matter what he commands.

73. Ahmadiyya:
The followers of Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmed of Qadian (as). (1835 to 1908)
They believe that he is THE PROMISED MESSIAH and IMAM MEHDI.
They believe in the FINALITY OF PROPHETHOOD OF THE HOLY PROPHET (pbuh) and that he was the SEAL of the all the Prophets.
They believe that the Jesus Christ was NOT CRUCIFIED but DIED a natural death.

40. Ashab Ta'áh:
They believe that Allah can send a prophet without giving him any sign to prove his prophecy.

41. Shabibiyah/Salihiyah:
Followers of Shabib ibn-Yazid al-Shaibani. They believe in the Imamate of a woman named Ghazalah.

42. Wasiliyah:
Followers of Wasil ibn-'Ata al-Ghazza. They believe that does who commit major sins will be punished in hell but still remain believers.

43. Ámriyah:
Followers of Amir ibn-Ubaid ibn-Bab. They reject the legal testimony of people from supporters of either side of the battle of Camel.

44. Hudhailiyah/Faniya:
Followers of abu-al-Hudhail Muhammad ibn-al-Hudhail. They believe that both Hell and Paradise will perish and that preordination of Allah can cease, at which time Allah will no longer be omnipotent.

45. Nazzamiyah:
Followers of abu-Ishaq Ibrahim ibn-Saiyar. They do not believe in the miraculous nature of the Holy Quran nor do they believe in the miracles of the Holy Prophet (pbuh) like splitting the moon.

46. Mu'ammariyah:
They believe that Allah neither creates life nor death but it is an act of the nature of living body.

47. Bashriyah:
Followers of Bashr ibn-al-Mu'tamir. They believe that Allah may forgive a man his sins and may change His mind about this forgiveness and punish him if he is disobedient again.

48. Hishamiyah:
Followers of Hisham ibn-ämr al-Futi. They believe that if a Muslim community come to consensus it needs an Imam and if it rebels and kills its Imam, no one should be chosen an Imam during a rebellion.

49. Murdariyah:
Followers of Isa ibn-Sabih. They believe that staying in close communication with the Sultan (ruler) makes one unbeliever.

50. Ja'friyah:
Followers of Ja'far ibn-Harb and Ja'far ibn-Mubashshir. They believe that drinking raw wine is not punishable and that punishment of hell could be inferred by a mental process.

51. Iskafiyah:
Followers of Muhammad ibn-Abdallah al-Iskafi. They believe that Allah has power to oppress children and madman but not those who have their full senses.

52. Thamamiyah:
Followers of Thamamah ibn-Ashras al-Numairi. They believe that he whom Allah does not compel to know Him, is not compelled to know and is classed with animals who are not responsible.

53. Jahiziayh:
Followers of 'Ámr ibn-Bahr al-Jahiz. They believe that Allah is able to create a thing but unable to annihilate it.

54. Shahhamiyah/Sifatiyah:
Followers of abu-Yaqub al-Shahham. They believe that everything determined is determined by two determiners, one the creator and the other acquirer.

55. Khaiyatiyah/Makhluqiyah:
Followers of abu-al-Husain al-Khaiyat. They believe that everything non-existent is a body before it appears, like man before it is born is a body in non-existence. Also that every attribute becomes existent when it makes its appearance.

20. Shaitaniyah/Shireekiyah:
They believed in the view that deeds of servants of Allah are substances; and a servant of Allah can really produce a substance.

21. Azraqaih:
Followers of Nafi ibn-al-Azraq. They do not believe in the good dreams and visions and claim that all forms of revelations have ended.

22. Najadat:
Followers of Najdah ibn-Ámir al-Hanafi. They abolished the punishment of drinking wine also they believed that sinners of this sect would not be treated in hellfire but some other place before allowed in Paradise.

23. Sufriyah:
Followers of Ziyad ibn-al-Asfar. They believed that sinners are in fact polytheists.

24. Ajaridah:
Followers of Abd-al-Karim ibn-Ajrad. They believed that a child should be called to Islam after it has attained maturity. Also they believed booty of war to be unlawful till the owner is killed.

25. Khazimiyah:
They believe Allah loves men of all faiths even if one has been a disbeliever most of his life.

26. Shuaibiyah/Hujjatiyah:
They believed that what Allah desires does happen no matter what and what does not happen it means Allah desires it not.

27. Khalafiyah:
Followers of Khalaf. They do not believe in fighting except under the leadership of an Imam.

28. Ma'lumiyah/Majhuliah:
They believed that whoever did not recognise Allah by His names was ignorant of Him and anyone ignorant of Him was a disbeliever.

29. Saltiyah:
Followers of Salt ibn-Usman. They believed in the conversion of adults only and if father has converted to Islam children were considered disbelievers till they reach maturity.

30. Hamziyah:
Followers of Hamza ibn-Akrak. They believe that children of polytheists are condemned to hell.

31. Tha'libiyah:
Followers of Tha'labah ibn-Mashkan. They believe that parents remain guardians over their children of any age until children make it clear to parents that they are turning away from truth.

32. Ma'badiyah:
They did not believe in taking or giving alms from or to slaves.

33. Akhnasiyah:
They do not believe in waging a war except in defence or when the opponent is known personally.

34. Shaibaniyah/Mashbiyah:
Followers of Shaiban ibn-Salamah al-Khariji. They believe that Allah resembles His creatures.
35. Rashidiyah:
They believe that land watered by springs, canals or flowing rivers should pay half the Zakat (tithe), while land watered by rain only should pay he full Zakat.

36. Mukarramiyah/tehmiyah:
Followers of abu-Mukarram. They believe that ignorance constitutes as disbelief. Also that Allah enmity or friendship depends upon the state of a persons' belief at his death.

37. Abadiyah/Afáliyah:
They consider Abdullah ibn-Ibad as their Imam. They believe in doing good deeds without the intention of pleasing Allah.

38. Hafsiyah:
Consider Hafs ibn-abi-l-mikdam as their Imam. They believe that only knowing Allah frees one from polytheism.

39. Harithiya:
Followers of Harith ibn-Mazid al-Ibadi. They believe that the ability precedes the deeds.

"real sect does everything for god only"
So, What is the name of this Real sect? I'm also giving you the list that is provided by Indian Muslims, it might be increased also because in your country there were also some of other existed.
1. Jarudiah:
Followers of Abu'l-Jarud. They believe Holy Prophet (pbuh) designated Al-Isa as the Imam by his characteristics but not by name.

2. Sulamania:
Followers of Sulaiman ibn-Jarir al-Zaidi. They believed Imamat was a matter of Jaririya conference and could be confirmed by two best Muslims.

3. Butriyah:
They did not dispute the Khilafat of Uthman (ra), neither they attack him nor Hurariyah praise him.

4. Yaqubiyya:
They accepted the Khilafat of Abu Bakr (ra) and Umar (ra), but did not reject those who rejected these Khulifaa. They also believed that Muslim commiters of Major sins will be in hell forever.

5. Hanafiyah:
Followers of the Imammate of Muhammad ibn-al-Hanifah. They believe that Allah might have had a beginning.

6. Karibiyah:
They believed that Imam Muhammad ibn-al-Hanifah is not dead and is the Imam Ghaib (in disappearance) and the expected Mahdi.

7. Kamiliyah:
Followers of Abu-Kamil. They believed companions to be heretic because they forsook their allegiance to Ali (ra) and condemn Ali (ra) for ceasing to fight them. They believed in the returning of the dead before the Day of Resurrection and that Satan is right in preferring fire to clay.

8. Muhammadiyyah:
Followers of Muhammad ibn-Abdullah ibn-al-Hassan. They do not believe/Mughairiyah that Imam Muhammad ibn-Abdullah died and that he is the Imam Ghaib and awaited Mahdi.

9. Baqiriyah:
Followers of Muhammad ibn-Ali al-Baqir. They believe him to be the Imam Ghaib and expected Mahdi.

10. Nadisiyah:
They believe that those who consider themselves better than anyone else are Kafirs (disbelievers).

11. Sha'iyah:
They believe that the one who has recited La Ilaha Il-Allah (there is none worthy of worship except Allah), whatever she or he does, will never be punished.

12. Ammaliyah:
They believe that faith for one is what he/she sincerely practices.

13. Ismailiyah:
They believe in the continuity of Imammate among the descendants of Ismail ibn-Ja'far.

14. Musawiyah:
They believe Musa ibn-Ja'far to be the Imam Ghaib and expected Mahdi / Mamturah.

15. Mubarakiyah:
They believe in the continuity of Imammate among the descendants of Muhammad ibn-Ismail ibn-Ja'far.

16. Kathiyah:
They believe that expected Mehdi will be twelveth Imam among the /Ithn Áshariya descendants of the Áli ibn-abi-Talib. (The Twelvers).

17. Hashamiya:
They Predicate a body to Allah and also allege Prophet (pbuh) of disobedience/ Taraqibiyah to Allah

18. Zarariyah:
They believe that Allah did not live nor had any attributes till He created for Himself life and His attributes.

19. Younasiyah:
Followers of Younas ibn-Ábd-al-Rahman al-Kummi. They believe that Allah is borne by the bearers of His Throne, though He is stronger than they are.

Means you are also living a life with double standard one side you try to show I'm the best but other side you are also disobeying the rules of Allah as like the candidates. Okay too much thanks to you for accepting truth again.

Have u ever seen election where the candidates boasted about their goodness. If ur a smart voter you wouldnt choose someone from that, but from his real daylife. and from others objective view about him. and if someone does black campaign toward other candidate, believing it without tabayun is stupid.

When I asked about yourself it is you who gave example that I'm follower of Mu7ammad. But couldn't explain which path are you following this is called blind faith. Like having stool but saying this is the ketchup of half ripped mango.

Haram investment…hm…there haram investment around me…as a moslem i kept warning and reminding. but i guess after 4 months being here, then i have to move again. Insha Allah next week ill move again for hijrah. phew…seeking islamic environment and people with same sect not easy…hm…hope one day could hijrah to medina as last hijrah destination. life is a journey ._.

The money also funds the "believers", such as you, who live in the land of the "infidels". After all, you did not deny when Chuck said that you are a twenty something muhammadan woman living in a Western country. Who do you think will or should fund your stay? The profit from those investments are also part of that funding. Every muhammadan talks about 'haram' investment but cannot wait to benefit from it.

Those you call "muslims" are muhammadans ie the followers of Muhammad.
Bukhari 2:18:154 "ALLAH'S APOSTLE SAID :'O FOLLOWERS OF MUHAMMAD! BY ALLAH: IF YOU KNEW THAT WHICH I KNOW YOU WOULD LAUGH LITTLE AND WEEP MORE–'".
Why did he not say 'muslims' or 'followers of allah'? Aisha also used the same nomenclature. WHY?

You know why Abu Bakr became the first caliph. He was the father of Muhammad's most favored wife and he had spent his wealth to prop up Muhammad. He was the only one who accepted to follow Muhammad without question and did not doubt him on any issue. For that gullibility Muhammad called him 'sadiqqui' and promised that he, Abu Bakr, would be the first to enter paradise. When someone mentioned that Muhammad had left Ali as his successor in his will, Aisha challenged "WHEN DID HE WRITE THAT WILL?". With Aisha's prominence in the movement and her animosity towards Ali, there was no likelihood of Ali becoming the first caliph ahead of her father

Charcoal/narcotics,
Which is the only 'religion' allowed in Saudi Arabia? MUHAMMADANISM. The Saudis are not only called but are muhammadans.That is why the two 'holy' places of the cult are located there and millions of devotees visit there endlessly. Your spirited attempt to distance muhammadanism from what the Saudis do is another taqiya.

Islam is like HIV. It infects society and then it quietly multiplies, using its subdued citizens as virus-producing hosts. Just like T-Lymphocytes infected with HIV produce an astonishing number of new vira, muslims produce an astonishing number of new offsprings , thereby spreading the disease throughout the body.

Also, like HIV, the patient remains asymptomatic for a long time, but once the symptoms show up, it is too late to do anything to save him/her. A society subdued by Islam has many severe symptoms, just like an AIDS-patient. But the underlying cause behind these symptoms is that the healthy citizens have become too weak or too few to protect themselves against the various agressors/opportunistic criminals.

Muslim countries have many more opportunistic criminals of all kind than non-muslim countries, and it is because there are simply too few healthy people left to fight off these criminals. The vast majority of their police force and army is totally corrupt and infiltrated by people who sympathize with muslim terrorists. Therefore they don't function well and criminals can do whatever they want. As a result their societies are practically dead.

If HIV is detected early on, it can be contained, but we must act quick and with a variety of treatments (discussions, exposing lies, etc.) or else our society will also develop AIDS – by that time it will be too late.

Muslims commit horrible atrocities at any perceived slight,yet they're convinced its ALL with "good reason" .
Here's the thing muslims have a hard time grasping…We don't need the Islamic texts to tell us that muslims will massacre and subjugate all-non muslims when they dominate.A simple observation of current muslim behavior around the world is all we need.Debunking the Quran is just a bonus.

the laws in arabia are based on sharia. it is a fact that in islam a man is above the women and believer above the kufr. the dhimmis are second class citizens. koran 9:29 makes it clear.
"stereotype islam=arab''……well, islam may have followers all over the world from all races but it is actually meant for arabs. quran 14:4 says ''And WE have not sent any Messenger except with revelation in the language of his people in order that he might make things clear to them''. language of which people? chinese? french? spanish? or arab?
''even their wealth put in''….saudi arabia wont survive without oil wealth. in fact i cant think of any islamic country that wud survive without outside help.
''who are they to become kings and princes? are they prophet descendents''?….. well, in islam there is no democracy. there is one religious head (caliph) who is to assume absolute power. he is also supposed to be the representative of god on earth. yes, that is the islamic concept.

mp11,
Most Jews are secular who do not believe in the literal interpretation of the Bible. Christians believe that the Bible is the inspired Word of God. But every muhammadan believes that the quran is the verbatim word of their god and has no human input. Therefore, 33.33% of American Christians is not the same as 100% of muhammadans. Even though Muhammad did say that he was inspired to write the quran and sura 81: 19 describes it as the "WORDS OF A NOBLE MESSENGER", muhammadans still cling to the notion that their book is the direct word of allah. Since the quran is the word of a noble messenger and Muhammad was the noble messenger, that means the quran is the word of Muhammad and he is allah.

Concept of blood in saudi arabia? ohh wait a minute. why mentioning saudi arabia? cos the stereotype islam=arab? Ahmad thomson already explained that saudi arabia isnt islamic country. the government system is infidel system. even their wealth put in infidels investation that used for destroying muslims. even the kingdom concept is obviously wrong. who are they to become king and princes? are they prophet descendants? are they best mukmins?

And why when it is a non-Muslim that is wronged he is not concerned about the justice of the matter? He says simply that Muslims should not aid a non-Muslim if they are wronged by Muslims. The justice or injustice of the matter is not even mentioned. So we have to balance the two statements. Muhammad illiteracy should not confuse us. We can take out the redundancies in his speech to make sense of it.

This along with all other parts of this document and the Quran should be studied together. Then we will easily see the intent was to create a fascistic community. The document starts with this statement:

This is a document from Muhammad the prophet between the believers and Muslims of Quraish and Yathrib and those who followed them and joined them and labored with them. They are one community (umma) to the exclusion of all men.

A more accurate statement instead of "according to Judaism" would be according to the Muslim misrepresentation of Judaism. The concept of "eye for an eye" was not practiced literally and was developed as a legal guide to restrict compensation to the value of the loss by Rabbis many centuries before Mohammed was even born. (^ Kalimi, Isaac; Haas, Peter J. (2006). Biblical interpretation in Judaism and Christianity. Continuum International Publishing Group. p. 2. ^ Pasachoff, Naomi E.; Littman, Robert J. (2005). A concise history of the Jewish people. Rowman & Littlefield. p. 64.

It's not surprising that Muslims have little to no inclination to learn about Judaism from authentic sources and rely on the misinformation contained in the Koran. After all, in the Koran Jews are despised and described in vile terms. It is surprising and disappointing that an ex-Muslim would continue to rely on a book he acknowledges is deeply flawed.

What these demented imbeciles fail to comprehend is that not all non-Muslims are stupid sheep – millions are, especially the "leftards." But some of us are FAR smarter than the bulk of Muslims. In general, Muslims are stupid and inbred. Even the smartest of them may not have an IQ over 110. I personally have an IQ far above 150, and I can see through their stupid garbage quite readily.

So, dumbass Muslim fanatics, have fun trying to convince me that your mentally deficient cult of lunatics has any merit whatsoever. It doesn't, and it needs to be tossed into the garbage can ASAP.

The passage you quoted only makes it illegal to kill a "believer unjustly". Being so specific about what is prohibited, muhammadanism makes the killing of a non 'believer' legal. Your accusation that Ali Sina whips up hatred against muhammadanism is seriously misplaced. It would appear that you are the one who has proved him right that muhammadans practice taqiyya.

Because without "good reason" the rest does not logically follow. Your omission gives the false impression that the command is for any and all killing while it in fact it concerns unlawful killing. It does not seem unreasonable for all the believers to be against a man who killed a believer unjustly.

Thanks for your prompt reply btw, if you would address the points on Judaism and Christianity it would be great.

The part that is omitted does not add or subtract anything to the argument that I make.
One has to keep in mind that Muhammad was illiterate and his thought processes are very confused and confusing. He jumbles many things in one sentence where for clarity he should have said the same thing in several sentences. This lack of clarity has worked to his advantage as it confuses people and they don't fully understand what he says. It also allows anyone to interpret what he says in anyway they please.
The part I took out should be stated in another sentence. It does in no way change the meaning of the part I quoted. I just took the garbage out. The part not quoted is redundant. It is understandable that no one should hold responsible someone who kills with just cause. Why say this at all when it is commonsense? And if he had to say it, why not state it in a separate sentence?

What constituted just cause for Muhammad? According to Judaism, a law that Arabs also observed, it was just to take a life for life. So, when in the market of Bani Qainuqa a Muslim killed a Jew, and the relatives of the victim killed the Muslim in retaliation, this wast just cause by the law of Moses and Arabs. However, Muhammad took this incidence as an excuse to massacre the entire tribe of Bani Qainuq. They were spared thanks to the intervention of Abdullah ibn Ubay but were forced to exile and all their belongings were take from them.

Whenever I read something by Sina, I make sure to check the original text. Case in point.

Sina version: "Whoever is convicted of killing a believer… the believers shall be against him as one man, and they are bound to take action against him"

Original : "Whoever is convicted of killing a believer without good reason
shall be subject to retaliation unless the next of kin is satisfied
(with blood-money), and the believers shall be against him as one man,
and they are bound to take action against him."

"We have to understand that there is a big difference between Islam and Christianity or Judaism. Muslims believe that the Quran is the verbatim word of God. Jews and Christians believe their sacred texts were written by humans who were inspired by God."

I have read this site for many years and have learnt a lot.
I would like to find out where in the Koran Sira or hadiths it is said that a muslim woman may not be alone in a room or a house with a non-related male over the age of 12 years

What a catastrophe that in spite of such well researched and fact loaded presentation there are still many nitwits who will choose to be deceived and, reasoning from their behind, argue that telling the truth amounts to bigotry and racism.
There was an article in the " Daily Beast" a few days ago of an American student who was slashed by muhammadans in East London. It is amazing to see the number of ignoramuses who, not only tried to play down the incident, but stated that both Judaism and Christianity are just as dangerous, if not more dangerous. (Please Google that if you may).
With a mentality like that the danger posed by muhammadanism is not apparent to those knuckleheaded apologists. Some of them claim to be atheists without realizing that in an unlikely event of a muhammadan take over their fate will be worse than that of the Christian and the Jew.
Daunting as the battle to enlighten the rest of the world is, there should be no relenting the effort. It should be fought in every paper which is in circulation. Repetition drives home the point. Let the muhammadans be on the defensive all the time.

i really used to think that irshad manji is a nice woman, like one of the muslims who has got a nice, peaceful idea of islam. cant believe that she would support sharia.
By the way, i really feel sorry for tommy robinson. he has fallen into the trap of taqiah.